DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31675] New: - Batik image readers fails

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: FOP updated to new Batik API

--- Thomas DeWeese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You say you 'fixed it', you should not > have moved the result stuff into the if. > No, I did not--it was *reformatted* correctly I meant! Glen __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site des

Re: FOP updated to new Batik API

Glen Mazza wrote: Patch applied! But please be careful to keep all if-statements within braces--for the second patch, the change at line 500 made the code look somewhat vague as to your intentions (see below--I fixed it though). Ahh yah, sorry for the confusion. You say you 'fixed it', you sho

Re: FOP updated to new Batik API

Patch applied! But please be careful to keep all if-statements within braces--for the second patch, the change at line 500 made the code look somewhat vague as to your intentions (see below--I fixed it though). (...previous { somewhere...) if (alpha != 255) hasMask = true; result[count++]

Re: FOP updated to new Batik API

I'll get to these this weekend. Thanks, Glen --- Thomas DeWeese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Glen, > > Thanks for doing this. > > I just updated my FOP and ran some FO/SVG > through it. > You seem to have gotten most of it, but I noticed > that > you didn't use TextPainterInfo.fillPa

Re: FOP updated to new Batik API

Hi Glen, Thanks for doing this. I just updated my FOP and ran some FO/SVG through it. You seem to have gotten most of it, but I noticed that you didn't use TextPainterInfo.fillPaint - instead you continued to use the value of the FOREGROUND attribute. You may not have noticed this becuase I

FOP updated to new Batik API

--- Thomas DeWeese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1.) We do not have plans anytime soon for making a > new > > release of maintenance--so, if I made the change, > the > > new pdftranscoder.jar could be based only on a > nightly > > build--is that OK with you? > >I think that would be fine. >

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17380] New: - Batik Component will not recognize feXXXX SVG elements

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: new batik

On Thu, 2002-05-16 at 17:53, Christian Geisert wrote: > Is it possible to make Fop work without batik.jar ? (of course if no svg > is used) This is addressed in the new code. Until then no, not without disabling it entirely.

AW: new batik

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Mai 2002 17:53 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: new batik > > > Keiron Liddle schrieb: > > Hi, > > > > Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can > go with this > > for the next release. > > > > I

Re: new batik

Keiron Liddle schrieb: > Hi, > > Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this > for the next release. > > I will put the new batik into cvs and update the code to work with it. Is it possible to make Fop work without batik.jar ? (of course

Version numbers (WAS:RE: new batik)

ay, May 13, 2002 8:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: new batik Alex wrote: > > Any chance of upping the version number of FOP to something like 0.91 > > because some people don't seem to like using software as low as 0.24 At 12:45 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: >I didn'

Re: new batik

Alex wrote: > > Any chance of upping the version number of FOP to something like 0.91 > > because some people don't seem to like using software as low as 0.24 At 12:45 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: >I didn't know making software was as easy as setting a number. I should have put a smiley in t

Re: new batik

On Mon, 2002-05-13 at 12:59, Alex McLintock wrote: > At 09:40 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this > >for the next release. > > > You mean we'll go with the next *release* of Batik with the next release of > FOP..

Re: new batik

At 09:40 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: >Hi, > >Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this >for the next release. You mean we'll go with the next *release* of Batik with the next release of FOP... We aren't shipping beta software with our release are we? Any cha

new batik

Hi, Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this for the next release. I will put the new batik into cvs and update the code to work with it. Keiron. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED