Re: CVS PDF-docs

[Jonathan Larmour <jifl at eCosCentric dot com>]

Iztok Zupet wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 October 2002 03:12, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
>
> > So you're saying it's no better than the alternative after all?
>
> Bad news: The WIDTH and SCALEFIT attributes work with jade only for the HTML 
> output. As for any kind of TeX output, these attributes are just skipped 
> (absolutely nothing is inherited by the tex file).
That's been a problem we've had before with jade. It's definitely a 
shortcoming.

> Good News: I found another way to define the size of the pictures imported 
> into pdf: modifying the DPI parameter results in different size of the PDF 
> output. If a picture is set to 150DPI, the resulting output in both the HTML 
> and PDF output is approximately the same size.
>
> I built a seemingly acceptable version of the tutorial (only) that way and 
> uploaded it to <http://www.vsr.si/ecos>. Please have a look at it (both PDF 
> and HTML). But use the zoom of at least 200% when inspecting pictures. And 
> probably try to print a picture.
>
> If it's kind of acceptable, I'll do also the user-guide, and finalize the 
> patch to post to this list, so that others can try with their set of tools.
Hmm.. yes. I don't like it, and I still think JPG is inappropriate, but 
other than that it isn't too bad. I wouldn't want to burn any bridges and 
absolutely commit to this approach as the One True Way, but I think it 
will be useful for some. But indeed, once we agree about JPG vs PNG you 
can post your patches to see if anyone else has trouble.

Jifl
--
eCosCentric       http://www.eCosCentric.com/       <info@eCosCentric.com>
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine