xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter West <peter.w...@hp.com>
Subject Re: Graphics2D implementations (was: Release coordination in XML Graphics)
Date Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:11:37 GMT
On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 16:37 +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 13.04.2006 16:19:08 Peter West wrote:
> <snip/>
> > > The Transcoders use the Graphics2D implementations to render the basic
> > > graphic elements. Special elements like links, text and more can
> > > optionally handled using special "bridge" classes (SVG/Batik-specific).
> > > 
> > Text which uses either the base14 or embedded fonts seems to be
> > rendering without invoking the bridge classes.  In general, text should
> > be able to be rendered through Graphics2D.  For the base14 fonts, some
> > extra work is required, but for fonts which are being embedded, the
> > bridge should not be required, should it? In fact, for base14, it is
> > only the co-ordination with the font configuration that's required,
> > isn't it?
> Not quite. All text from Batik is normally painted by internally
> converting it to shapes. This is done using the fonts that are available
> to the Java2D subsystem and has nothing to do with font configuration
> provided by FOP.
> Only when we register a bridge class for text painting can we select
> simple-enough text elements that we can paint using native operators.
> Only in this case will base 14 fonts (or configured fonts - the
> PDFTextPainter doesn't really care) be used. That's when our own font
> system kicks in.

Let's back up a step. That's text from Batik. But is Batik needed to
render text in a PDFGraphics2D?  Can FOP render text as well as graphics
without involving Batik?


Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org

View raw message