Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster@xxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > There was some list traffic about this several times in the not-too- > distant past... I can't remember the content of all the discussions, but > the idea of whether to use FOP was definitely tossed around. Could > anyone with some time and inclination check the archives and try to > summarize the discussions here? Or is that unnecessary? If someone > were to do that, I would put a page up on the wiki in an agreeable place > (and with an agreeable name) just so we have a reference point. The concern was that FOP needed some non-GPL assistance to render some graphic content. Specifically, FOP can render BMP, EPS, GIF, JPEG and TIFF files without any assistance. With JIMI or JAI (which are not GPL'ed), PNG can be rendered. With BATIK, also an Apache product, SVG files can also be rendered. None of the non-free assistant packages are included or distributed with FOP. FOP will notice these add-ons if present, but will work without them, with the only caveat being PNG input will not work. The official details are at http://xml.apache.org/fop/graphics.html, for those who are interested. Cheers
Attachment:
pgpU0hq8MbAQd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
