OK, thanks. The messages certainly don't indicate that we turned down any proposal, per se. I happened to be talking about PDFLib and CLibPDF specifically in one referenced message, but Fotis (and others) were talking about the others, and the idea is all the same. It sure looks to me like we were looking specifically at integration, but I don't recall that we were talking about _inclusion_. It was as straightforward as saying, "do we have good interfaces for allowing other PDF producers to be used, and if not, do we want to?"
The main thing, though, is that I think this issue just died. Nobody had very strong opinions. We had PDF code all along that met the needs of the moment. No argument that other PDF libraries may have done specific things better all along, or maybe many things better, but we never (as I recall) found the PDF generation side of things to be a major problem. It's always been property handling and layout. Regards, AHS -----Original Message----- From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: March 12, 2002 7:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: merging two libraries The references that I found are: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=86952068309324&w=2 and http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=86952068308872&w=2 both over 2 years ago. On 2002.03.12 11:56 Arved Sandstrom wrote: > I can't seem to usefully search the archive (no search terms have any > apparent effect), so I'll just have to assume that we did talk about it. > If > someone has the URL and/or search terms that actually work then I can > revisit, but in the meantime it doesn't ring a bell that we at any time > flat-out refused to "join forces", so to speak. I am not saying we didn't > give that appearance, but I don't remember anything that positive. > > So I second Keiron in asking, what kind of useful cooperation do you > propose? > > I've been aware of iText for quite a while - I tried it out when it was > still rugPDF - and I'll speculate that if anything was a question at an > earlier time that perhaps there was no clear idea of how iText would help > FOP. And that statement would have to be interpreted in the light of what > iText offered at the time. I'm prepared to accept that the PDF rendering > capabilities of iText have gotten considerably better in the meantime, > and > it makes sense to look at the matter again. IMO. > > Regards, > Arved Sandstrom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
