To be more clear, I propose we replace FOP's implementation of UAX14 with
use of ICU's line break iterator, and that ICU becomes a standard
dependency for FOP.

However, before taking a decision on this, allow me to create a branch (on
github) that actually makes this change so that folks can evaluate it. Is
that a reasonable approach?


On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:

> My position is that it is costing us in interoperability (I mean lack
> thereof) by failing to use ICU. I don't see any issue about size.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Vincent Hennebert 
> <vhenneb...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 18/06/13 06:46, Glenn Adams wrote:
>> > Is there a reason FOP doesn't use ICU for determining line break
>> > boundaries? The FOP implementation of UAX14
>> (org.apache.fop.text.linebreak)
>> > seems to be out of date and basically unmaintained. According to [1], a
>> > number of Apache projects are using it, including PDFBox, Xalan, and
>> Xerces.
>>
>> I think the main reason in the past has been the size of the ICU4J jar
>> compared to FOP’s own jar:
>> http://markmail.org/thread/krkqlircefpuxlse
>>
>> I guess the topic could be revisited today. We could consider adding it
>> as an optional dependency, or acknowledge that full Unicode support is
>> taken for granted nowadays and use it by default.
>>
>> >
>> > [1] http://site.icu-project.org/#TOC-Apache-Projects
>> >
>>
>> Vincent
>>
>
>

Reply via email to