(I'm CCing batik-dev and fop-dev once to invite everyone to discuss this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please repond on general only and do not cross-post unneccessarily.)
Concerning the proposed TLPs I'm wondering if FOP and Batik shouldn't go together somehow. Both projects deal with XML to graphics conversions. FOP currently has 2 Batik Transcoder implementations (additional output formats for Batik: PDF, PS/EPS). So there is some kind of overlap which needs to be dealt with sooner or later. One possibility is to move the transcoders over to Batik but parts of them are FOP-specific so both projects should somehow be able to work on the common code. Moving these out of FOP still means a dependency on FOP's PDF, PostScript and font support code. These might need to be separated into "Commons" projects to be accessible to both projects and to ensure compatibility and cooperation. Sorry if this is a bit technical and not entirely on-topic but I thought this may have to be addressed in this discussion. To be fully on-topic again: When the XML project becomes a federation of projects it may make sense to create pointers to other rather XML-oriented projects which live in the Jakarta area (like Jakarta ECS, Jakarta Commons Betwixt, Digester, Jelly, JXPath, there may be others). As for the question about preference for XML Commons. I'd like to see Apache Commons become more live. In this aspect XML Commons should IMO go over to Apache Commons. On the other side, it may well be that Apache Commons will, to a great extent, also be a federation project. And moving too many project over there will create an oversight problem there in time. I guess the decision here depends on the development of Apache Commons and the projects intentions. So in the end I'm unsure what to prefer. In general, I currently don't see any showstoppers in Berin's proposal. On 04.01.2004 12:23:55 Berin Lautenbach wrote: > Have put together a very rough draft of how a federation of projects > around XML might be created. > > Caveat - it really is very draft, and purely there as a discussion > starter. Feel free to either post comments/thoughts back to the list or > to edit the document directly. (Note that this document does not yet > discuss next steps, such as agreements from each sub-project etc.) > > All comments very welcome. The board requested a proposal by the Jan > board meeting (normally around the 20th of the month), so it would be > good to move the discussion forward - whether around this or another > proposal. > > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?XMLProjectPages/FederationProposal Jeremias Maerki
