- ntg-pdftex - NTG Mailing Lists

[ pdftex-Patches-334 ] Setting MF mode by new token register \pdfmfmode
by noreply＠sarovar.org 25 May '05

25 May '05

Patches item #334, was opened at 2005-05-02 23:31 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=495&aid=334&group_id=106 Category: Fonts Group: v1.21b >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Hartmut Henkel (hhenkel) Assigned to: The Thanh Han (hanthethanh) Summary: Setting MF mode by new token register \pdfmfmode Initial Comment: Can be dumped into the format, see README. Regards, Hartmut ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Hartmut Henkel (hhenkel) Date: 2005-05-25 00:05 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=929 this is in pdftex-20050524, and will be in pdftex-1.30. It's now named \pdfpkmode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=495&aid=334&group_id=106

1 0

Re: [NTG-pdftex] new pdftex snapshot
by Akira Kakuto 23 May '05

23 May '05

Thanks for the new snapshot. The following is Heiko's "null string" patch. Binary header is also added. best, Akira --- pdftex.ch.orig Fri May 20 18:32:32 2005 +++ pdftex.ch Mon May 23 21:50:44 2005 @@ -884,7 +884,13 @@ pdf_buf[6] := "."; pdf_buf[7] := "4"; pdf_buf[8] := pdf_new_line_char; -pdf_ptr := 9; +pdf_buf[9] := "%"; +pdf_buf[10] := 228; +pdf_buf[11] := 240; +pdf_buf[12] := 237; +pdf_buf[13] := 248; +pdf_buf[14] := pdf_new_line_char; +pdf_ptr := 15; pdf_gone := 0; zip_write_state := no_zip; pdf_minor_version_written := false; @@ -2018,8 +2024,10 @@ begin i := str_start[s]; j := i + length(s) - 1; - if (i > j) then + if (i > j) then begin + pdf_print("()"); return; {null string} + end; if (str_pool[i] = '(') and (str_pool[j] = ')') then begin pdf_print(s); return;

3 2

Ugly rules in PDF
by Taco Hoekwater 23 May '05

23 May '05

Hi, After some discussion with Karl Berry on math-font-discuss: At Bachotek2005 there was a talk about the Latin Modern fonts, and there was a small math example included, of course. The presentation was shown using Adobe's PDF reader, and as you probably know, it displays the rules TeX draws for fractions and the radical bar horribly. The same is, in fact, true for xpdf and ghostview. The general problem is that rendering graphics and rendering text are not the same thing in PDF (nor PostScript), and that makes it hard for a viewer to align the two objects correctly. Our 'problem' is that people in general believe this is a bug in pdftex :-( An example file is at http://tex.aanhet.net/temp/mathtest.pdf Especially look at the top left of the sqrt signs. The source code is trivial: $$\sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{x+1}}+1}+1}+1}+1}$$ I volunteered to write a patch for pdftex to try to remove the problem by making pdftex use a repeated character instead of a rule, but I am still a bit unsure about the best solution. Also, I vaguely remember that possibly somebody had done something with \radical a long time ago already, so I thought I'd ask feedback before doing any actual coding. Here is what I propose: The creation of a new primitive called \mathrulechar, with the following semantics. Adding \mathrulechar="0130 somewhere in the TeX source would make subsequent \radical commands use a suitable number of repetitions of the character "30 in math family 1 instead of the horizontal rule pdfTeX draws currently. No additional macros are involved in the process. (A suitable character has to be available, of course. It should be a dash, positioned flat on top of the baseline, no sidebearings) Greetings, Taco

5 4

pdftex-20050520 snapshot zlib problem
by Hartmut Henkel 21 May '05

21 May '05

when putting it into the 1.21a, i get here: Error: pdfetex: zlib: deflateInit() failed ==> Fatal error occurred, the output PDF file is not finished! Anybody else? checking... Regards, Hartmut

1 2

New Didot-point
by Nagy Bence 20 May '05

20 May '05

Dear All, I have a new tipometer now, and I wondered, that by Rotring Didot-point is no more 0,376 but 0,375 mm. Actually the new Didot-size is more komfortable, because one Cicero is exactly equal to 4,5 mm, two Cicero to 9 mm. I have attached a small patch, which introduces two new units: nd (new didot) and nc (new cicero). Maybe we have to follow the sounds of new times. Any comments? Greetings, Bence -- Nagy Bence | Tipográl.hu

4 6

new pdftex snapshot
by The Thanh Han 20 May '05

20 May '05

Hi, I have uploaded a new pdftex snapshot to pdftex.sarovar.org/src djgpp is also available (pdfetex only) I didn't change the version and banner, as Martin will decide what to be there when he makes an official release. Now I recognize that I forgot the microinterval patch from Taco. Sorry about that, will upload another one tomorrow Thanh

1 0

New Didot-point
by Nagy Bence 20 May '05

20 May '05

Dear All, I have a new tipometer now, and I wondered, that by Rotring Didot-point is no more 0,376 but 0,375 mm. Actually the new Didot-size is more komfortable, because one Cicero is exactly equal to 4,5 mm, two Cicero to 9 mm. I have attached a small patch, which introduces two new units: nd (new didot) and nc (new cicero). Maybe we have to follow the sounds of new times. Any comments? Greetings, Bence -- Nagy Bence | Tipográl.hu

1 0

New Didot-point
by Nagy Bence 20 May '05

20 May '05

Dear All, I have a new tipometer now, and I wondered, that by Rotring Didot-point is no more 0,376 but 0,375 mm. Actually the new Didot-size is more komfortable, because one Cicero is exactly equal to 4,5 mm, two Cicero to 9 mm. I have attached a small patch, which introduces two new units: nd (new didot) and nc (new cicero). Maybe we have to follow the sounds of new times. Any comments? Greetings, Bence -- Nagy Bence | Tipográl.hu

1 0

Re: [tex-implementors] Ugly rules in PDF
by WillAdams＠aol.com 19 May '05

19 May '05

In a message dated 5/18/05 12:51:05 AM, taco(a)elvenkind.com writes: > Not this one, apparently (pdftex already outputs stroked lines). > Interesting. I'd not noticed that. There's some interesting discussion of it in comp.text.tex ~1999, w/ one of the observations being that using stroked lines improves 300dpi output. FWIW, if one turns on ``Smooth line art'' in Adobe Acrobat 5 (probably 6 and 7 too) there's not that much difference in the appearance of the rendering of the square root rule / character in Hans' example file (which is hinted at in the afore-mentioned discussion, and noted by Hans in a post on the ConTeXt list as making this matter worth re-examination). At some magnifications things are about identical, at others one gets a double-pixel medium grey line, and the other gets a single-pixel dark grey line. Hopefully at some point in time we'll just get high-resolution displays everywhere and this sort of thing will cease to be an issue. Isn't there a Unicode slot for fraction bar (I know the Mac encoding has a slot for fraction slash)? How is this handled in the soon-to-be-released stix fonts? (http://www.stixfonts.org) William

3 2

Re: [tex-implementors] Ugly rules in PDF
by WillAdams＠aol.com 18 May '05

18 May '05

I think ``horribly'' is a bit extreme. Rules are drawn like any other filled rectangle, and can be set to be anti-aliased in viewers which support that setting for graphic objects. Using a character is an interesting idea, but has difficulties as Hans noted. Just replacing it w/ a stroked line would be an alternative worth considering IMO. William

6 12