On 25.03.2005 12:35:35 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
> >>You seemed to hint that there were Batik dependencies in these
> >>classes do you know what they are?
> >
> > Mainly applyPaint() which uses Batik-specific subclasses of the AWT
> > Paint class. That means the basic Grap
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
You seemed to hint that there were Batik dependencies in these
classes do you know what they are?
Mainly applyPaint() which uses Batik-specific subclasses of the AWT
Paint class. That means the basic Graphics2D implementation would have
to be either subclassed or, better, ext
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
We still have the two general solutions in the Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/XmlGraphicsCommonComponents
Proposal 2 is clearly superior to make the dependencies clearer and the
make things easier for our users as well as the Batik team.
Chris said he preferred that
On 18.03.2005 20:03:07 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
> Hi Jeremias,
>
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
> > A proposal 2a (a kind of compromise) would involve putting the basic
> > Graphics2D implementations in the Commons area (no dependencies on Batik).
> > The transcoders themselves would go into Batik.
>
Hi Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
A proposal 2a (a kind of compromise) would involve putting the basic
Graphics2D implementations in the Commons area (no dependencies on Batik).
The transcoders themselves would go into Batik.
This is what I envisioned all along.
Of course, this also splits thi
We still have the two general solutions in the Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics/XmlGraphicsCommonComponents
Proposal 2 is clearly superior to make the dependencies clearer and the
make things easier for our users as well as the Batik team.
Chris said he preferred that the transcoders shou
