gobbled it up into docs; and removed from trunk.
--
Jody Garnett
On Friday, 8 April 2011 at 1:52 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> > Agreed; and thanks for removing those dependencies it really helped.
> > The gt-svg module is focused just on rende
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Agreed; and thanks for removing those dependencies it really helped.
> The gt-svg module is focused just on rendering svg icons now right? Could we
> add a utility class to it?
It is focused yeah, not meant to be an hodge podge of "everything
Agreed; and thanks for removing those dependencies it really helped.
The gt-svg module is focused just on rendering svg icons now right? Could we
add a utility class to it?
I would be content steel the good bit out of gt-svgsupport as a code example
for docs; nobody will be using gt-docs as a d
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:09 AM, Michael Bedward
wrote:
> Hi Jody
>
> gt-render already depends on the batik library for SLD stuff. I
> remember we specifically excluded the batik library in the example
> poms at some stage because we didn't want all that stuff confusing
> users (or was it for ano
Hi Jody
gt-render already depends on the batik library for SLD stuff. I
remember we specifically excluded the batik library in the example
poms at some stage because we didn't want all that stuff confusing
users (or was it for another reason ?). So I wonder whether it's a
good idea to have such a
Currently it is a module; in the demo directory. I could take on svg as a
dependency for docs/ and have this as a simple code example instead.
I have no svg plans afoot.
But yeah it occurs to me that an unsupported "svg", "print" and "pdf" module
would not go amiss as they are common rendering
Hi Jody,
It's only tiny - is it worth a module ? Perhaps just make it an
example instead. Or do you have SVG plans afoot ?
Michael
On 7 April 2011 00:55, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Sounds good to me.
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> The gt-svgsupport class has be
Sounds good to me.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> The gt-svgsupport class has been hanging out in "demo" forever. Now that we
> have this unsupported directory can we move it over and document the silly
> thing?
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
>
> ---
The gt-svgsupport class has been hanging out in "demo" forever. Now that we
have this unsupported directory can we move it over and document the silly
thing?
--
Jody Garnett
--
Xperia(TM) PLAY
It's a major breakthrough
