Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Glen Mazza wrote: --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are you so keen on removing stuff? I'd be more concerned about adding the stuff that's missing for an initial release. Just cleaning up for the next release. Jimi works fine for some people. No reason to remove this. OK, so it does work for the Java 2 platform. We'll keep it then. I haven't been following the developments very closely, so this may sound like a stupid question: does that mean that FOP HEAD now works nicely with PNGs without JIMI? Has the code from Batik been merged in, or has another solution emerged? cheers, dalibor topic
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're stuck, though. On 01.10.2004 15:31:15 Dalibor Topic wrote: I haven't been following the developments very closely, so this may sound like a stupid question: does that mean that FOP HEAD now works nicely with PNGs without JIMI? Has the code from Batik been merged in, or has another solution emerged? Jeremias Maerki
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Jeremias Maerki wrote: Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're stuck, though. thanks for the quick responce, Jeremias. I'm going to be a bit involved with Fedora documentation project's attempt to build up their toolchain using FOP on GNU Classpath based runtimes[1], so I'm glad to hear that there is a chance of having PNG work out of the box in the next release. My initial experiments with Kaffe FOP a while ago have been encouraging. I am considering spending some time getting FOP to work on gcj, Kaffe and other runtimes, as I'd like to use it to generate man pages for kaffe using kaffe, among other things. I assume HEAD is the best place to start for an interested developer? cheers, dalibor topic [1] And with debian's efforts to get FOP into main.
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
If you got a long breath, yes. We're are still a few months from a release. The layout code is in the process of being completely rewritten, so many features available in 0.20.5 are still missing. On 01.10.2004 17:10:34 Dalibor Topic wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're stuck, though. thanks for the quick responce, Jeremias. I'm going to be a bit involved with Fedora documentation project's attempt to build up their toolchain using FOP on GNU Classpath based runtimes[1], so I'm glad to hear that there is a chance of having PNG work out of the box in the next release. My initial experiments with Kaffe FOP a while ago have been encouraging. I am considering spending some time getting FOP to work on gcj, Kaffe and other runtimes, as I'd like to use it to generate man pages for kaffe using kaffe, among other things. I assume HEAD is the best place to start for an interested developer? cheers, dalibor topic [1] And with debian's efforts to get FOP into main. Jeremias Maerki
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
On 01.10.2004 18:06:13 Clay Leeds wrote: Please clarify: As the Subject implies, Glen's original message indicated he wanted to remove Jimi (I understand that won't be the case now). He said nothing of removing JAI, and as far as I understand, FOP-1.0 will still need JAI for PNG support (please correct me if I'm wrong). Nobody talks about removing JAI support. Will JAI be required by FOP-1.0 for PNG and also be required for some subformats of TIFF[1]? Yes, except that we can use the ImageIO API from JDK 1.4 and later. But in the end ImageIO also uses JAI codecs to support the different formats. We could also have another look at open source codecs to support PNG and TIFF etc. Jeremias Maerki
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
On Oct 1, 2004, at 2:30 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 01.10.2004 18:06:13 Clay Leeds wrote: Please clarify: As the Subject implies, Glen's original message indicated he wanted to remove Jimi (I understand that won't be the case now). He said nothing of removing JAI, and as far as I understand, FOP-1.0 will still need JAI for PNG support (please correct me if I'm wrong). Nobody talks about removing JAI support. Just wanted to be sure... I saw the following and was confused: On Oct 1, 2004, at 6:39 AM, Jeremias Maerki wrote: Not a stupid question at all, but no, with FOP 0.20.5 you still need either JIMI or JAI for PNG support. But it may well be that the next FOP version will support PNG without an additional library. For now, you're stuck, though. But it may well be that the next FOP will support PNG without an additional library. Will JAI be required by FOP-1.0 for PNG and also be required for some subformats of TIFF[1]? Yes, except that we can use the ImageIO API from JDK 1.4 and later. But in the end ImageIO also uses JAI codecs to support the different formats. We could also have another look at open source codecs to support PNG and TIFF etc. Jeremias Maerki Maybe the idea of adding open source codecs is what you were referring to. Thanks for the response... Web Maestro Clay
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are you so keen on removing stuff? I'd be more concerned about adding the stuff that's missing for an initial release. Just cleaning up for the next release. Jimi works fine for some people. No reason to remove this. OK, so it does work for the Java 2 platform. We'll keep it then. Thanks, Glen
Re: Remove image.JimiImage from HEAD?
Why are you so keen on removing stuff? I'd be more concerned about adding the stuff that's missing for an initial release. Jimi works fine for some people. No reason to remove this. On 24.09.2004 05:31:21 Glen Mazza wrote: (resending...having email problems) Team (probably Jeremias), According to [1] JIMI is for pre-Java2 JDK's (1.1 series). JAI is for 1.3 or later JDK's [2], which is FOP 1.0's area of concern. If so, does this mean we can get rid of image.JimiImage in HEAD, FOP 1.0 presumably not designed to support pre-1.3 anyway? Thanks, Glen [1] http://java.sun.com/products/jimi/ [2] http://java.sun.com/products/java-media/jai/INSTALL.html#SystemRequirements Jeremias Maerki
