xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <...@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Subject Re: Issues for after the IF branch merge
Date Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:52:58 GMT
On 16.02.2009 17:11:33 Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Follow-up issues for after the merge where I'd be glad for feedback:
> - The new implementations currently all use a MIME suffix ";mode=painter".
> They are now sufficiently tested that I'm confident that we can switch
> over to them by default. One idea would be to put a switch in
> RendererFactory so we can say: prefer IFDocumentHandler instead of
> Renderer implementation. Or rather the opposite: by default use the
> IFDocumentHandler but allow to switch to the old mode should there be an
> unexpected incompatibility. Good idea or bad?


I've done this now, but in the more careful variant. People can switch
back to using Renderer if they need to do so.


However, if this is necessary for anyone I'd like to hear about it. The
only reason I can currently imagine is if someone uses a FOP extension
such as Barcode4J or JEuclid. The necessary new extension is already
available from Barcode4J's CVS HEAD. Max, if you want help or have
trouble updating JEuclid, please let me know.

> - Given the performance figures I think it would be possible to
> deprecate the following implementations: PDF, PS, PCL and AFP. As for
> the Java2D implementations: the PNG, Print and AWT Preview parts are not
> implemented, yet, so a deprecation here is premature. TXT is probably
> good enough like it is. No change necessary there. After all, we won't
> deprecate the Renderer interface itself. Good idea or bad?

I'm a little hesitant to just go ahead here without more than one
opinion. I could interpret the silence (and the +1 votes on the merge) as
lazy assent but I'd be more comfortable with a bit more nodding. Thanks.


Jeremias Maerki

View raw message