On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 01:49:08PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:14:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:52:29AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > > > Actually, imagemagick uses Ghostscript, and Ghostscript doesn't do a good
> > > > work at low res render
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 03:14:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:52:29AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > > Actually, imagemagick uses Ghostscript, and Ghostscript doesn't do a good
> > > work at low res rendering.
> >
> > Even with -dTextAlphaBits=4 ?
>
> What is it supposed
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 11:52:29AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > Actually, imagemagick uses Ghostscript, and Ghostscript doesn't do a good
> > work at low res rendering.
>
> Even with -dTextAlphaBits=4 ?
What is it supposed to do ?
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 12:42:40PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:57:32AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > > Using ps2epsi+imagemagick, you can convert directly from Postscript to a
> > > bitmap format with anti-aliasing, with no need for manual fix.
> >
> > Thanks! I'll tr
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:57:32AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > Using ps2epsi+imagemagick, you can convert directly from Postscript to a
> > bitmap format with anti-aliasing, with no need for manual fix.
>
> Thanks! I'll try that.
Actually, imagemagick uses Ghostscript, and Ghostscript doesn
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:40:39PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 07:36:27PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
...
> Using ps2epsi+imagemagick, you can convert directly from Postscript to a
> bitmap format with anti-aliasing, with no need for manual fix.
Thanks! I'll try that.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 07:36:27PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Is there a ready script? That would be handy.
I don't know. It shouldn't be hard to write.
> > If you create a script, the number of the symbols is not important. The script
> > can also create the necessary dialog code.
>
> No
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:26:11PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
> > I looked at Goossen et al. for the AMS symbols, and there is A LOT of
> > them.
>
> How do you create misc.xbm ?
> Did you use a script ?
Is there a ready script
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> I looked at Goossen et al. for the AMS symbols, and there is A LOT of
> them.
How do you create misc.xbm ?
Did you use a script ?
If you create a script, the number of the symbols is not important. The script
can also create the n
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:45:05AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Am I right in supposing that this code only gets used if you wish to use
> a symbol from mathed on your toolbar? Never tried it.
I don't know. I've never looked at the stuff in the frontends directory.
Andre'
--
André Pönitz ...
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 11:31:01AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > Improved patch included. The only weak spot I see: you can press these
> > buttons without Ams Math enabled, and then it won't latex. Any ideas on
> > that?
>
> Ye
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Improved patch included. The only weak spot I see: you can press these
> buttons without Ams Math enabled, and then it won't latex. Any ideas on
> that?
Yes. validate() needs to be fixed someday...
> + if (id
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 06:05:23PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > Attached. And I am open to suggestions how to do this more elegantly ;-)
>
> What exactly do you need the 'mathbbX' macros for (I did not look to
> closely, so maybe it's obvious)
Improved patch included. The only weak spot I s
13 matches
Mail list logo
