On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Bob Tarling <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd like to return to an old thread - > http://argouml.markmail.org/thread/dnjazv53pp24yjgf > > It has been pointed out that GEF could be improved as it stands > (without batik) for better Java2d support but nobody is doing this. As > I'm sure you're aware I'm already fairly busy concentrating on UML2 > functionality. > > If we use Batik it will add some amount of extra jar files to the > ArgoUML download but it will leave less code to be maintained in GEF, > remove any effort to fix SVGWriter in GEF and allow all the complex > code in GEF that tries to allow the ancient Graphics class to be > removed. I'm confused as to how Batik will have any effect on the Graphics2D-ness of GEF. Are you proposing that GEF be replaced with Batik? I didn't think it performed the same function. > From there we may be able to make use of sexier looking fill gradients > in Figs and plan for a better mechanism to use for line widths, This requires work in GEF (or its replacement), the ArgoUML application, and whatever component is used for SVG generation. > If someone says that they definitely will fix GEF to make it entirely > Graphics2D friendly then fine I won't bother with batik. However if > that is distracting anyone from UML2 then that is not really a good > thing either. I pushed a long time ago on replacing GEF, so I'm not opposed to that, but it's not clear to me how Batik can be used as a replacement. Taking advantage of the Graphics2D capabilities of Batik won't happen until GEF supports Graphics2D (or it's replaced with something that does). Tom ------------------------------------------------------ http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2738279 To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]]. To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: [[email protected]]
