Paul A. Rubin schrieb:
Daniel Lohmann wrote:
>> [...]

More precisely:

\usepackage[letterpaper]{geometry}

messed up the layout completely [...]


How did \usepackage[letterpaper]{geometry} mess up the layout?

It also changed the column width, which resulted in a 7 instead of 5 pages document and made the "ACM copyright box" (a fixed area on the bottom of the first column ACM uses for copyright and bibliographic information) run into the second column.

I assume from your location that you usually want to use A4 and just need letter for certain special situations (such as the one you described). Attempting to do the reverse of what you want (switch from letter, my default, to A4), I discovered that if you just change the paper size in the LyX document settings, it supplies the new size as an option to the document class, and pdflatex seems to ignore that. If you also switch from default margins to custom margins, though, LyX loads geometry and supplies the paper size (along with the margins) as options to geometry, and for me that seems to work.

The point is that I do not want to specify margins (again), it should just use whatever margins the class defines as default. I just want the package to issue the backend-driver specific /special commands for defining the paper size.

BTW: I observed a strange behavior that could be considered a bug (LyX 1.4.5, Windows & Linux): After I changed margins to "Custom" Lyx added, as you described, a \usepackage[...]{gemometry} to the LaTeX preamble, which resulted in the messing up I described. So I changed margins back to "Default". However, from that point on LyX still included the geometry package. In the end I had to revert to an older version of the document, as I was not able to make LyX *not* include geometry. Can somebody else confirm this? Probably a problem only with such brittle classes as ACM, though.

> I'm using a different class, though, so perhaps ACM is
> susceptible to format problems where AMS is not.

Well, yes :-) ACM classes are known to be quite fragile. The tools computer scientists design for their own lot tend to be like that...

Thanks Paul!

Daniel

Reply via email to