Hi Jonathan,
jonathan wood <[email protected]> wrote on 12/08/2009 04:11:32
PM:
> Is Batik headed to w3c svg 1.2+?
I hope so ;)
> I need Batik 1.2 and beyond. I will soon be implementing 1.2+
> functionality simply because "we" need it and it does not exist. I
> wonder how many others are at this cusp?
Is there a stable 1.2+ to target? Already I see a lot of
places where the SVG WG seems happy to redefine functionality
that was in SVG 1.0. I would be a little wary of trying to
track the WG too closely.
What sort of functionality are you looking at implementing?
> I'm willing to help and the effort will positively impact my
> employer. I want to apache commit and will start the process
> tonight, but I need help...
So typically one becomes a committer by making contributions over
time. This is tricky in this case as I'm the only active committer
(for some definition of active ;) so making those contributions will
be complicated.
I'd suggest something like the following. First off get the
Apache paperwork out of the way (Contributor License Agreement, etc).
Then if you can pick two or three features you are looking to implement
you can push those to Bugzilla as a standard SVN patch file. If
that goes well then we can start the process of making you a committer.
> How many others would possibly backfill a 1.2 functionality push.
At this point I don't have the time to do development on Batik.
> Would the Batik 1.8pre team advise, augment and support a push to
> SVG 1.2 (current state)?
I am supportive of Batik development (with the cautions above).
I'd be happy to provide guidance/suggestions as wanted/needed.
