Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Glen, We can do it this way. But on second thought, I think it would be better for Renaud to move it in as AWTRenderer, and slowly start factoring out more and more while things are getting settled. BTW, this will take some time to do anyway--it isn't easy because the renderers are so different between 0.20.5 and 1.0. That's what I'm doing now. And yes, it might take some time... [A note for Renaud: I would recommend cutting down on the chatroom English and instead start writing properly/respectfully to us, in the same manner that all of us have been writing to you. Capitalize I, the first word of each sentence, your name, our names[1], greetings, etc. Above all, when people write to you in standard polite English, you shouldn't be responding back with chatroom writing. None of us here do. Thanks!] Glen [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-devm=110625230922690w=2 Your note sounded hard to me. My apologies to you and the other members of the team. In the future i'll use standard English. Please do not take my writing style as a sign of misrespect, as this was NOT my intention. This style is pretty well accepted in Switzerland (in German, we have to capitalize all Words, so this saves a lot of Typing) and i find it personally nicer. If you have other objects like [1] in your stack, please let me know it now (via this maillist or directly to me). As I said in [2], I am pretty new to open-source developpment, so please let me know if i'm doing things the right way. I'm enjoying this project and would like to move forward smoothly (and respectfully of the other members of this team). Regards, Renaud [2] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]msgId=2080086
RE: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Renaud Richardet wrote: Your note sounded hard to me. My apologies to you and the other members of the team. In the future i'll use standard English. Please do not take my writing style as a sign of misrespect, as this was NOT my intention. This style is pretty well accepted in Switzerland (in German, we have to capitalize all Words, so this saves a lot of Typing) and i find it personally nicer. I doubt that anyone, including Glen, was offended by your style. You did nothing wrong, nothing worthy of a public censure. I will resist the strong temptation to flame the antagonist and simply say that politics are at work as much in open source projects as they are anywhere else. I hope you will not be offended either by what passes for leadership in FOP, or the awkward silence from the rest of the team. Your efforts are appreciated, and I doubt that I am the only subscriber to this list who was embarrassed by the rudeness with which you were treated here. Victor Mote
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
On Feb 23, 2005, at 7:28 AM, Victor Mote wrote: Renaud Richardet wrote: Your note sounded hard to me. My apologies to you and the other members of the team. In the future i'll use standard English. Please do not take my writing style as a sign of misrespect, as this was NOT my intention. This style is pretty well accepted in Switzerland (in German, we have to capitalize all Words, so this saves a lot of Typing) and i find it personally nicer. I doubt that anyone, including Glen, was offended by your style. You did nothing wrong, nothing worthy of a public censure. I will resist the strong temptation to flame the antagonist and simply say that politics are at work as much in open source projects as they are anywhere else. I hope you will not be offended either by what passes for leadership in FOP, or the awkward silence from the rest of the team. Your efforts are appreciated, and I doubt that I am the only subscriber to this list who was embarrassed by the rudeness with which you were treated here. Victor Mote Thanks for voicing up Victor... I'd intended to write a private note to Renaud showing the same conviction, but under the ciircumstances, I suspect a public note is more appropriate. Victor, I am grateful for your continued attention to all things FOP... Renaud, I was not offended by your 'tone' of voice. I did take notice of your writing style, but I was not offended. I suspected your tone was one of camaraderie rather than disrespect. I figured at some point you would've modified your writing style to be similar to how others write, but it wasn't a big enough issue to me to send you an e-mail. Just the same, if I had made a comment, it would've been a private note. Glen, I also very much value your contributions to the FOP and XML Graphics community. I sincerely hope that in the future you will show some restraint in your communications style. You come off as gruff occasionally, but you are also a very valued member of the FOP community (in my opinion). One thing I know for certain, is that it would be great if we could all get together for a beer (root beer or ginger ale is acceptable for those trying to cut down!) Cheers! Web Maestro Clay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
--- The Web Maestro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing I know for certain, is that it would be great if we could all get together for a beer (root beer or ginger ale is acceptable for those trying to cut down!) I know...sad thing is, you're the closest committer to me and California is thousands of miles away! (We can meet halfway though...perhaps Pittsburgh would be good... ;) Glen
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
On Feb 23, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Glen Mazza wrote: I know...sad thing is, you're the closest committer to me and California is thousands of miles away! (We can meet halfway though...perhaps Pittsburgh would be good... ;) Glen With my luck, we'd still be on opposite sides of the continent! Would that be Pittsburgh, CA or Pittsburgh, PA? Actually, I'll be in Park City, UT this weekend and next (flying back to CA to work in between!). Don't worry, though, I'll think of FOP while I'm drinking! But I will try to keep away from my keyboard and mouse when there's a beer in the other hand! Wouldn't want to accidentally commit anything! ;-) Cheers! Web Maestro Clay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Jeremias Maerki wrote: snip/ So here are the proposed changes: - Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d - AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java - Java2D*.java) I think the viewer subpackage can stay as is under the renamed package. Any objections? None from me. Chris
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Jeremias Maerki schrieb: Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer. [..] Any objections? Not at all. Christian
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
On Feb 21, 2005, at 11:03 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote: So here are the proposed changes: - Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d - AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java - Java2D*.java) I think the viewer subpackage can stay as is under the renamed package. Any objections? [1] http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/guide/2d/spec.html Jeremias Maerki None from me! The simple and more transparent, the better. Web Maestro Clay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer. AWT Renderer has a rich history within FOP, it's a popular renderer, and I have not heard of any complaints or confusion from the user community about its naming. Its output is that neat-looking AWT/Swing window, so it's not that incorrect a name. The internal technology we use to generate said window is IMO less important than what the user sees. The API in use is actually the Java2D API [1], although most of the classes had their origin within AWT (and are still in there). Mein Freund, even the Java2D library itself (from the link you gave below) uses .awt. in their package names and not .java2D.. Why should we use .java2D. in our package names when even Java2D itself doesn't/won't? Also, using this logic, shouldn't we rename the (future) TIFF Renderer--which Oleg says will descend from AWTRenderer--and current SVG Renderers to Java2DRenderer as well? Don't they use Java2D as well? Now, if you want to create a Java2DRenderer as a abstract base class for Renderers utilizing it--AWTRenderer, AWTPrintRenderer, SVGRenderer, TIFFRenderer, etc., that would appear to make a lot more sense. Consider that before you tie Java2DRenderer specifically with our AWTRenderer. AWT is actually the windowing toolkit which is something that's not used inside the renderer. True, but PDF is not used within the PDF Renderer. Text codes /0 /0 /a /c etc. etc. are instead. To a degree, using this logic here would then call for us renaming PDF Renderer to BinaryOutputCodesRenderer. Only when the Java2D renderer is embedded inside a GUI application AWT (or rather Swing or SWT) are coming into use. Yes, so far we have been naming our renderers on the final output that the user sees (here, an AWT/Swing window), not the internal technology used in generating that output. And the preview window actually uses Swing, not AWT. But Swing sits on top of AWT, no? Also, I suspect there are AWT-specific packages within the AWTRenderer anyway (such as the EventHandlers and EventListeners like java.awt.event.ActionEvent). AWTRenderer appears more accurate overall then SwingRenderer, and has the added benefit of not sounding as silly. ;) So here are the proposed changes: - Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d -0.5, because java2d itself uses awt in its package name, and we use (or will use) java2d for more than the AWTRenderer. It's more consistent as-is. Also, AWTRenderer gives the user a better mental model of what the output of this type is -- and AWT/Swing Window with a document in the middle. Java2DRenderer sounds like an intermediate renderer that can be output in several different ways, not just an AWT window. - AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java - Java2D*.java) -0.5, because, again, other renderers use or may use Java2D. And we can't all be renaming our renderers BinaryOutputCodesRenderer.java and Java2DRenderer.java. Note, of course, these aren't vetoes. Regards, Glen
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
On Feb 22, 2005, at 8:16 AM, Glen Mazza wrote: --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer. AWT Renderer has a rich history within FOP, it's a popular renderer, and I have not heard of any complaints or confusion from the user community about its naming. Its output is that neat-looking AWT/Swing window, so it's not that incorrect a name. The internal technology we use to generate said window is IMO less important than what the user sees. Well stated, Glen. In the grand scheme of things, the name of the 2 dimensional graphics renderer (?) doesn't matter much to me. Web Maestro Clay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
On 22.02.2005 17:16:56 Glen Mazza wrote: snip/ Now, if you want to create a Java2DRenderer as a abstract base class for Renderers utilizing it--AWTRenderer, AWTPrintRenderer, SVGRenderer, TIFFRenderer, etc., that would appear to make a lot more sense. Consider that before you tie Java2DRenderer specifically with our AWTRenderer. Actually, that was what I had in mind but obviously haven't explained well enough. AWT is actually the windowing toolkit which is something that's not used inside the renderer. True, but PDF is not used within the PDF Renderer. Text codes /0 /0 /a /c etc. etc. are instead. To a degree, using this logic here would then call for us renaming PDF Renderer to BinaryOutputCodesRenderer. Huh? Lots of dependencies on the PDF package in the PDF renderer. Only when the Java2D renderer is embedded inside a GUI application AWT (or rather Swing or SWT) are coming into use. Yes, so far we have been naming our renderers on the final output that the user sees (here, an AWT/Swing window), not the internal technology used in generating that output. Not only an AWT/Swing window. We're also printing, creating bitmap images and we can (via JPS) create PDF and PS files. That's why AWT doesn't really fit what it does. And the preview window actually uses Swing, not AWT. But Swing sits on top of AWT, no? Also, I suspect there are AWT-specific packages within the AWTRenderer anyway (such as the EventHandlers and EventListeners like java.awt.event.ActionEvent). AWTRenderer appears more accurate overall then SwingRenderer, and has the added benefit of not sounding as silly. ;) :-) So here are the proposed changes: - Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d -0.5, because java2d itself uses awt in its package name, and we use (or will use) java2d for more than the AWTRenderer. It's more consistent as-is. Also, AWTRenderer gives the user a better mental model of what the output of this type is -- and AWT/Swing Window with a document in the middle. That's only one use case. Java2DRenderer sounds like an intermediate renderer that can be output in several different ways, not just an AWT window. EXACTLY That's exactly what is my intention with this proposal. - AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java - Java2D*.java) -0.5, because, again, other renderers use or may use Java2D. And we can't all be renaming our renderers BinaryOutputCodesRenderer.java and Java2DRenderer.java. I don't buy that. Note, of course, these aren't vetoes. A veto would have been easier. :-) I would simply have stopped and said: Sigh. Again. Ok, next task. Would it be more interesting/agreeable if we would leave the render.awt package and create an AWTRenderer that is optimized for embedding into AWT/Swing applications? The AWTRenderer would subclass the Java2DRenderer in the render.java2d package. Improving embeddability of the AWTRenderer was something I also had in mind. We've had several instances where people had trouble embedding the AWTRenderer in their application or simply use the preview form. Jeremias Maerki
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A veto would have been easier. :-) I would simply have stopped and said: Sigh. Again. Ok, next task. Yes, but the change proposed simply doesn't rise to the level of a veto. Would it be more interesting/agreeable if we would leave the render.awt package and create an AWTRenderer that is optimized for embedding into AWT/Swing applications? Close. How about this: AWTRenderer is just for our pop-up AWT/Swing window with the document in the middle. It will extend an (abstract?) Java2DRenderer, and will not really be meant to be extended or modified by other users. Java2DRenderer, OTOH, is what is used for others for embedding into AWT/Swing applications. AWTRenderer, in addition to being our own native renderer, will be an excellent example of how to extend Java2DRenderer in the user's own programs. Simplest use case: someone wants Java2D output but doesn't like our AWTRenderer. Wants to add some buttons, remove others from the window, do 400 other things. They will extend the Java2DRenderer to embed this technology into their own work. By way of analogy: AWTRenderer = Squiggle Java2DRenderer = Whatever Batik does to allow other users to create their own Squiggle apps. (Sorry, I don't know Batik! ;) WDYT? Glen
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Deal. It seems like we want the same things but didn't understand each other. I hope we do now. I've documented all this in a Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/FopAndJava2D You said that we name our renderer on the final output the user sees. So I also added a print and bitmap package to the proposal for illustration. I hope that's also what you have in mind. I'm quite happy like this although the individual packages will be relatively thin. On the other side, the old AWTRenderer simply did too much in one class for my taste and at the same time had the wrong name. The new layout also doesn't require that I prepare the ground for Renaud. Also, I hope this Wiki page helps him see the direction what we'd like the thing to go. Everybody happy? On 22.02.2005 18:29:41 Glen Mazza wrote: WDYT? Jeremias Maerki
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Deal. It seems like we want the same things but didn't understand each other. I hope we do now. I've documented all this in a Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/FopAndJava2D Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before or after Renaud moves the logic over is up to you two. There's advantages/disadvantages to either method. Thanks, Glen
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before or after Renaud moves the logic over is up to you two. There's advantages/disadvantages to either method. yes, that looks good! Jeremias, if it's ok for the team, i would apreciate if you would do the changes asap. thanks, Renaud
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Given the new layout I don't even need to prepare anything. It would only complicate things. Just rename the AWTRenderer to Java2DRenderer, move it to the new location, then create an empty subclass of Java2DRenderer called AWTRenderer and move any AWT-dependant code to that subclass. On 22.02.2005 22:43:01 Renaud Richardet wrote: Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before or after Renaud moves the logic over is up to you two. There's advantages/disadvantages to either method. yes, that looks good! Jeremias, if it's ok for the team, i would apreciate if you would do the changes asap. thanks, Renaud Jeremias Maerki
Re: Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
We can do it this way. But on second thought, I think it would be better for Renaud to move it in as AWTRenderer, and slowly start factoring out more and more while things are getting settled. BTW, this will take some time to do anyway--it isn't easy because the renderers are so different between 0.20.5 and 1.0. [A note for Renaud: I would recommend cutting down on the chatroom English and instead start writing properly/respectfully to us, in the same manner that all of us have been writing to you. Capitalize I, the first word of each sentence, your name, our names[1], greetings, etc. Above all, when people write to you in standard polite English, you shouldn't be responding back with chatroom writing. None of us here do. Thanks!] Glen [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-devm=110625230922690w=2 --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Given the new layout I don't even need to prepare anything. It would only complicate things. Just rename the AWTRenderer to Java2DRenderer, move it to the new location, then create an empty subclass of Java2DRenderer called AWTRenderer and move any AWT-dependant code to that subclass. On 22.02.2005 22:43:01 Renaud Richardet wrote: Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks good! Now whether you wish to do this before or after Renaud moves the logic over is up to you two. There's advantages/disadvantages to either method. yes, that looks good! Jeremias, if it's ok for the team, i would apreciate if you would do the changes asap. thanks, Renaud Jeremias Maerki
Renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer
Now that we've got someone who will work on the AWT Renderer I'd like to know if someone is against renaming the AWT Renderer to Java2D Renderer. The API in use is actually the Java2D API [1], although most of the classes had their origin within AWT (and are still in there). AWT is actually the windowing toolkit which is something that's not used inside the renderer. Only when the Java2D renderer is embedded inside a GUI application AWT (or rather Swing or SWT) are coming into use. And the preview window actually uses Swing, not AWT. So here are the proposed changes: - Package org.apache.fop.render.awt becomes org.apache.fop.render.java2d - AWTRenderer.java becomes Java2DRenderer.java (AWT*.java - Java2D*.java) I think the viewer subpackage can stay as is under the renamed package. Any objections? [1] http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/guide/2d/spec.html Jeremias Maerki
