Comments below. -----Original Message----- From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: March 14, 2002 11:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: development status
From: "Peter B. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ SNIP ] > Arved is, as you know, engaged in a > C/C++ project for a fast, small footprint FO Processor over at > SourceForge, and I copy all of my design discussions to him. He has > just committed another set of perl modules to his prototype. Why not put it here, in FOP. Hey, xml.apache is not only Java. Has this been tried? -----End of Original Message----- I've had the urge to try a SAX-based approach that uses C/C++ for quite a while. The main motivation behind C/C++ is so that SWIG can be used and therefore open the door at one fell swoop for Perl, Python, Tcl, Ruby etc etc. The main motivation behind SAX is to radically reduce memory consumption. I've only really gotten started on a prototype after the New Year. Prior to that I had too much other stuff going on - job switching (one employer going bust, working on a contract, and now fulltime again with a new employer), personal affairs (nothing bad, just that real life intrudes from time to time :-)), and quite frankly, a certain amount of FOP burnout - I was fed up with the codebase and needed to take a break. In the interim Keiron and Karen have really stepped up to the plate. They are doing great stuff. As it stands you can only have so many people doing what they are doing - 2 is about the limit - so I, like others, am waiting for the right moment to get involved in the redesign coding again. You may have noted that I volunteered to look at image support for the redesign and I am devoting time to that this weekend, so I haven't forsaken FOP in the least. Why is xslfo-proc (the Sourceforge project) not in Apache XML? Because the tide has turned for people wishing to make donations of unsupported codebases. A SAX-based, non-Java XSL formatter is basically an entirely different project - the rule of thumb these days is that you incubate the project somewhere else, like Sourceforge, develop a user and developer community, and then and only then do you look at bringing it into the Apache fold. And I completely agree with this. You're 100% right - Apache XML is not just about Java. But programming language is not the reason xslfo-proc is not a sideproject to FOP. It is all about community. If this codebase was side-by-side with FOP right now it would be a distraction at best. It would (possibly) divert resources from FOP rather than independently develop its own. That's not just my opinion; there have been discussions about alternate implementations before and I think there is a consensus that we don't diffuse the FOP effort at this time. But there is also no rule that any of us XSL enthusiasts cannot pursue parallel experiments, and that is what xslfo-proc is for me. I hope that answers a few questions. Regards, Arved Sandstrom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
