Jan-Peter Voigt <jp.vo...@gmx.de> writes: > Am 01.08.2013 15:40, schrieb David Kastrup: >> >>> AFAICS the font-size is absolute, but there seems to be a calculation >>> inaccuracy of 0.1pt. >> Does the patch in >> <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3483> help? >> > a quick test, after building lilypond including this patch still shows > 41,9pt.
Rats. > So there still seems to be an inaccuracy - maybe its a float very near > 42 that is rounded/truncated/whatever to a tenth pt number while > importing the PDF. The metrics according to Pango appear to be in 0.1pt increments. If we are talking about PostScript/TeX point confusion, 42pt are 41.84bp, so that would be _just_ short of 41.9bp after rounding. I would not rule it out as a source of the problem (particularly if Pango has to round to get into its 0.1pt scale, and back again), but I am somewhat sceptical nevertheless. The main question is likely whether we now get consistent results from LilyPond: Kieren reported inconsistent sizes depending on how the absolute font size was arrived at. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
