I am not understanding your question either but the two screenshots are using the same fonts. Just one is being rendered poorly for unknown reasons.
Robby On Saturday, June 28, 2014, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@cs.indiana.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > At Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:43:46 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > At Fri, 27 Jun 2014 11:56:39 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> >> > For some reason, the way that PDF fragments are pulled in by > `pdflatex` > >> >> > makes the fragments look worse in some PDF viewers/machines than > the > >> >> > way that PS fragments are pulled in by `latex` plus `dvips`. I > think it > >> >> > has to do with heuristics in PDF viewers, and I think there's no > >> >> > difference when going to a printer. > >> >> > >> >> My impression was that PDF was supposed to be a pixel-accurate > format, > >> >> at least when self-contained and not using system fonts, and thus > >> >> there wouldn't be any such heuristics. Is that not true? > >> > > >> > PDF is a vector-graphics format, not a raster-graphics format (so it > >> > doesn't really say anything about pixels). > >> > >> Right -- what I meant was that at a given size, rendering should be > >> pixel-accurate, so that you shouldn't see differences between > >> different viewers (unlike, say, HTML, which doesn't prescribe layout > >> nearly as precisely). > > > > Maybe the alignment problem (now fixed) in Robby's example obscured the > > issue. It's just about the smoothness of the rendering. > > > > That is, PDF specifies exactly where things should be on a cartesian > > plane, but renderers draw the same image with different pixels > > depending on the display resolution, how much time the renderer spends > > on anti-aliasing, and so on. The "look worse" part above was meant only > > about the appearance of shape edges, and not about shapes being in the > > wrong location. > > In the particular `e ::= ...` example, this is an issue of font > rendering, right? IOW, the shapes being drawn differently between > dvipdf and pdflatex are fonts placed in particular spots on the page. > > Sam >
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
