> It would seem cleaner to have this (very well-written)
> information on the Batik site--so all Batik users can
> be aware of it--and add a Forrest <note> on the FOP
> SVG page letting them know (1) you don't need to use
> FOP for SVG->PDF generation, and (2) referring them to
> this information on the Batik site. (This may also
> have the added benefit of routing User ML questions on
> SVG transcoders properly to the Batik site.)
I agree totally. Now that the pdf-transcoder is distributed with batik it is
even more
appropriate.
Glen, do you think you would be able to help out with this, a quick patch or
two?
Thanks.
> Glen
>
> --- Jeremias Maerki <dev.jeremias@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Back from the beach... :-)
> >
> > I do. Keiron probably, too. This is about the
> > transcoders (SVG->PDF,
> > SVG->PostScript, SVG->EPS) that represent a very
> > useful Batik extension.
> > You can see it as some kind of sub-subproject of
> > FOP. We can probably
> > separate the Transcoder documentation from the rest
> > a bit to avoid
> > confusion. So a simple remove is to quite the right
> > way. I'll add it to
> > my todo list to write up something new if nobody
> > else does it first.
|
