On 18/06/13 12:12, Glenn Adams wrote: > 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?
Sure, although creating a branch on Subversion would probably be preferable. > > 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 seems to be out of date and basically unmaintained.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 , 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. >>> >>>> >>>>  http://site.icu-project.org/#TOC-Apache-Projects >>>> >>> Vincent