On 07.03.2020 20:52, Gil Barmwater wrote:
>
> I've made more progress here and now have a set of HTML files, etc. for the
> rxmath book. In spite
> of the fact that the source is essentially the same and the stylesheets are
> as well, the output
> appears different in a number of ways. I can only attribute this to the
> different versions of the
> DocBook stylesheets being used by the two processes or possibly the different
> way the two handle
> xinclude. I have put the zipped folder in my Dropbox here
> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/lqv49jl2obgwxjn/rxmath.zip?dl=0> and would
> appreciate feedback on what
> to tackle in order to make them look better.
>
Your HTML renderings look great, even better than P.O. Publican renderings,
congratulations !!
The area that needs attention is how the size for the graphics gets defined, it
is also where your
renderings look better than Publican's, where clipping occurs. Example:
* 2.3 RxCalcSqrt()
o Gil's HTML text for the syntax diagram:
<div class="mediaobject"><img src="images/funcs/funcs_rxcalcsqrt.svg"
width="297" />
o Publican's HTML text for the syntax diagram:
<div class="mediaobject"><object
data="images/funcs/funcs_rxcalcsqrt.svg" type="image/svg+xml" width="297">
</object></div>
The general problem with the definition of the size of the syntax diagrams lies
in setting the width
to the absolute value "297" pixels!
The original docbook text for this is:
<imagedata fileref="images/funcs/funcs_rxcalcsqrt.svg" scale="55" />
The svg has a bounding box of 472x68:
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"; width="472" height="68">
So it seems that "297" is probably hardcoded in the xsl.
This has in principal the downside that all images, irrespectible how wide they
are in reality, get
reduced/enlarged to fit the 297px width. This makes the syntax diagrams look
irregularily sized and
ugly. (In the Publican case it is even worse as there the object-element is
used which will clip the
image.)
Consulting [1] one can see that 297px width corresponds to 159.28 mm = 15.93 cm
= 6.22 in.
Looking at all the svg bounding boxes in the rxmath book, the widest one is
"funcs_rxcalcpower.svg"
with a width of 634 px = 167.75 mm = 16.78 cm = 6.55 in. If rendering for paper
the printable width
(A4) is wide enough to host the syntax diagram without any distortion or
clipping.
Therefore I would suggest to remove the width attribute from the img element
(and use the img
element [2] over the object element [3]).
Finally, both, the Publican and Gil's HTML renderings show that the svg images
display and scale in
the highest resolution.
@P.O.: there would be no need anymore to recreate the HTML renderings for the
rexxpg book.
So, Gil, thumbs up! +1
Great job!
---rony
[1] "Convert Pixel (X) to Millimeter":
<https://www.unitconverters.net/typography/pixel-x-to-millimeter.htm>
[2] HTML "img" element: <https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_img.asp>
[3] HTML "object" element: <https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_object.asp>
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
