Hi Glenn, Firstly, although this is loosely related, can you try to keep the emails in the thread relevant, this is going to be a verbose thread so we don't want to add to the confusion. As for the public API, I don't believe IFPainter is part of the public API, but I'm not sure who does and doesn't agree. I wrote that wiki page in hope that we'd come to some consensus, but it just moved from the fore of conversation, looks like we're back there.
Mehdi On 2 April 2012 16:24, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Jeremias Maerki <d...@jeremias-maerki.ch >> > wrote: >> >>> There must be a really, really good reason to change the frontmost >>> public API of FOP in a backwards-incompatible way. Changing the API will >>> cause considerable work for all users when they upgrade. We must not do >>> that on a whim. >>> >> >> Would you consider a minor, but substantive technical change to the IF >> APIs, specifically, to IFPainter, to require a revision of the major >> version? I ask this because one of the arguments to IFPainter.drawText() >> has been changed from int to int in the recent complex scripts merge. >> >> In other words, are the IF public APIs to be considered part of the >> formal public FOP API that is subject to version control rules? >> >> Do we have a precise list of which APIs are (or should be) subject to >> such rules? >> > > I found http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/embedding.html#API > > But I see this doesn't list IFPainter, even though > IFDocumentHandler.startPageContent() returns an IFPainter. > > Also, I should mention that the CS patch made two minor, but substantive > changes to the IF schema (and thus output format). Should changes to the IF > schema also be subject to public version control rules? > >