Le 24/04/2016 17:23, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 01:54:31PM +0100, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 24/04/2016 05:03, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 06:08:31PM +0100, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 18/04/2016 02:20, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
I imagine Guillaume did not intend this as a full patch,
Indeed.
More importantly, the patch does not change anything for me. I am
testing with lyxinkscape.lyx and lyxinkscape.svg that can be downloaded
from #9778 (note you need to change the path to lyxinkscape.svg in that
LyX file). Do you see the problem before your patch is applied and does
the problem go away after applying your patch? Attached is the
screenshot for me.
The difference between the bad display and the good display in this example
svg is the formula in the bottom right, which I can see on your screenshot.
To you see this formula before the patch?
Ah yes I do see what you mean. I did not realize that. Because it was so
small I just assumed it was corrupted.
It is strange that it displays so small, here it is at least twice as wide.
But here too I find it too small. I tested and the preview is smaller than
in 2.1.4, so there may be a regression.
Interesting. This could be a separate issue. I will do a bisect.
A final comment---what about svgz?
The patch is correct in this respect.
Good to know.
I attach a new testcase.
My comments on the previous email still apply (regarding this new
testcase). But now I do see that your patch does make an improvement.
And regarding your new testcase, it does not lead to worse display, it
is just that my display capabilities of SVG seem to be handicapped,
with or without the patch.
More importantly, you are reporting that the patch works on your machine:
LyX displays what you get in the pdf.
Yes you are right.
Your last iteration of the patch looks ok to me. Let's just ask Georg if
this is what he had in mind in his comment at #9778.
Probably related: http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/9228
