Innovation again (was Re: Text classes)

[John-Val Rose]

Well, that’s all fine but you didn’t address the issue of working with someone within Oracle to get these innovations done.

Sure, I could just toil away by myself but clearly it would be better all around if there was someone with much more extensive knowledge of JavaFX and its internals who was accessible when required.

I would assume that a member of the Oracle JavaFX team would be such a person. If not, then who?

> On 6 Dec 2017, at 15:53, Philip Race <philip.race at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> I think looking at it as an Oracle-owned and controlled project maybe the first mistake here.
> Yes it was closed source and then Oracle controlled, but not any more, OCA requirements aside.
> It is not even a "java specification". It can be evolved at an API level without a JSR.
> The JEP process is the main thing to be followed, although we also use CSRs too to track API.
> Consider it that anyone who is a contributor owns (not the right word ?) a piece of it too.
> So standing on the project is what matters. Not the company who pays you to work on it.
> 
> -phil.
> 
>> On 12/5/17, 8:21 PM, John-Val Rose wrote:
>> Phil et. al.,
>> 
>> Whilst I’m not going to be quite as “passionate” as some on this issue (although I do understand the frustration), I would like to point out again that this is indeed a huge gap and it is critical that it is filled ASAP.
>> 
>> Obviously a solution where every word in a text document is a Node would be unworkable so it would need to be architected from the ground up.
>> 
>> I would be happy to work on such as feature, just as I was happy to work on implementing WebGL, but my hesitation is concern over the assistance and involvement from Oracle.
>> 
>> If I am going to have to spend months working on something without any or only minimal involvement from Oracle, only to find at the end that Oracle either doesn’t like the design, implementation or something else then it is wasted time I’ll never get back.
>> 
>> There are lots of other innovations too that I would like to see in JavaFX but I just don’t “feel the enthusiasm” from Oracle.
>> 
>> If there is someone on the JavaFX team who would be willing to work with me (at least in some capacity), please have them contact me privately via email.
>> 
>> The innovations I could work on and contribute include:
>> 
>> 1. WebGL support in WebView
>> 2. Better text support including text documents&  rich text editors etc.
>> 3. Significant improvements in scene graph rendering speed using modern game-engine style structures and algorithms
>> 
>> JavaFX cannot survive without innovation and I am keen to see it happen and contribute as much as possible.
>> 
>> Graciously,
>> 
>> John-Val Rose
>> Rosethorn Technology
>> 
>>> On 6 Dec 2017, at 11:36, javafx at use.startmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sorry about all the typos previously.
>>> 
>>> Question- why not use the code in awt ? I am not totally up on what's going on with the platforms' native rendering engines ( meaning, I have no idea whatsoever) or how they have changed, but golly it sure does still work pretty well.
>>> 
>>>  At least it seems to me looking at awt that a smallish number of things are 1) well defined by the native platofrm and 2) would more or less translate directly to an Java API and 3) from those small number of building blocks, (Font and Glyph metrics and this kind of thing)   text line layout algorithms can be written by ordinary civilians along with all the other stuff that goes into a text editor.
>>> 
>>> And yes, everything does look easy when someone else is going to do it.
>>> 
>>>