Hey,
It looks really good!
Jon
2009/12/9 Jean-Louis Faucher
> Jon
>
> Thanks for the odg files.
>
> You can have a look at the build 5396 on the build machine : in oodialog,
> dlgArea looks great page 423 :-)
>
> For sample1, I extracted the png and refer it directly : the pdf format
> does no
I took a look at you new rxsock.pdf file. And I am VERY pleased with the
results. The image objects look much more crisp with no fuzziness at all.
Very nice.
David Ashley
On 12/08/2009 05:39 PM, Jean-Louis Faucher wrote:
Tested with the build machine, rxsock.pdf looks good except the empty
ar
Jon
Thanks for the odg files.
You can have a look at the build 5396 on the build machine : in oodialog,
dlgArea looks great page 423 :-)
For sample1, I extracted the png and refer it directly : the pdf format does
not bring more quality here (bitmap).
Jean-Louis
Hi Jean-Louis,
they are there now
Jon
2009/12/8 Jean-Louis Faucher
> Jon
>
> They should be in docs/trunk/oodialog.
> I'm working there (trunk).
>
> Jean-Louis
>
>
> --
> Return on Information:
> Google Enterprise Sear
Tested with the build machine, rxsock.pdf looks good except the empty area
under the figures.
I think it's the format of the page that must be adjusted in OODraw, to be
limited to the image area.
In the html doc, I see that some text is displayed on the right of the
figures.
Is it intended ? becau
Jon
They should be in docs/trunk/oodialog.
I'm working there (trunk).
Jean-Louis
--
Return on Information:
Google Enterprise Search pays you back
Get the facts.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev
_
I just did the three of them.
Where would you like them?
Jon
2009/12/8 Sahananda (Jon) Wolfers
> Hi Guys,
>
> Bad news on the dlgarea jpg source. I don't have anything that you don't
> have. I can't remember how I created them now, though I do remember that
> dlgarea1.jpg took forever and I
There are a number of image files for which we do not have the source. A
big one is the ooRexx logo. A friend of Mark Hessling created that
image. We should ping Mark and see if we can get the source.
Also note that a lot of images are duplicated in each subdir for each
document. Please do not
Hi Guys,
Bad news on the dlgarea jpg source. I don't have anything that you don't
have. I can't remember how I created them now, though I do remember that
dlgarea1.jpg took forever and I wasn't happy with the result. I think
sample1 was just a screen shot that I pasted into paint.
As for spare
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Jean-Louis Faucher
> wrote:
>> I propose to do the changes on rxsock, and test the result with the build
>> machine.
>> Then I will apply the changes to the rest of the documentation, if it works.
I'm fine wi
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Jean-Louis Faucher
wrote:
> I propose to do the changes on rxsock, and test the result with the build
> machine.
> Then I will apply the changes to the rest of the documentation, if it works.
>
> Here are my questions :-)
>
> Q1
> In which directory do I apply the c
I propose to do the changes on rxsock, and test the result with the build
machine.
Then I will apply the changes to the rest of the documentation, if it works.
Here are my questions :-)
Q1
In which directory do I apply the changes : docs/trunk ? (I think it's
mandatory for the build machine)
What
I also have to confess that I don't know anything about the pdf image
format. But I am always interested in improving the documentation in any
way that makes sense and does not have a large impact on our audience.
David Ashley
On 12/08/2009 10:38 AM, Mark Miesfeld wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 a
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Jean-Louis Faucher
wrote:
> This proposition has no impact on the HTML documentation.
> ...
> But if the
> group is interested, I can investigate to verify if the toolset supports
> this format.
I'm definitely interested in better images for the PDF doc. I've
noti
SVG format requires manual install of an add-in (which is actually quite
hard to find) on IE8. Tried it the other day (and had some problems).
I'd recommend against it.
Separately, PDF uses its own internal rendering (essentially the inking
commands of PostScript). Those commands can handle
This proposition has no impact on the HTML documentation.
By removing the .png suffix of the images in the sgml files, the system
(Jade) can decide which format to look for : .pdf when target is print, .png
when target is html.
This is parameterized in the customation layer oorexx.print.dsl (to ind
The .odg file can be exported as a .svg, which is supported on the
browsers, that I've used.
Bruce
On Dec 8, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
> The pdf version of the images certainly do scale better than the .png
> versions. What impact does this change have to the generation of
> .html
I guess I don't know enough about how images are stored in a .pdf. I
*assumed* that they were stored in the graphic format supplied. Some
formats are supported by the "Reader" software, such
as .jpg, .gif, .png, .bmp for raster images, and .svg for vector
graphics.
So what you are saying
The pdf version of the images certainly do scale better than the .png
versions. What impact does this change have to the generation of
.html output?
Rick
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Jean-Louis Faucher
wrote:
> Currently, we generate .png images from their source .odg files
> (OpenOffice), a
I don't believe Jean-Louis is suggesting that the odg images be used
directly, but rather we convert them to pdf images rather than .png
images when generating the documents. This would not impose and
requirement on the read to have open office installed.
Rick
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 9:36 AM, CVB
Jean-Louis,
The basic idea sounds good to me, but not being familiar with the .odg
file type, I wonder if it will display and print correctly on systems
that do not have some version of Open Office installed. Perhaps you
can send out a .pdf that contains a .odg image in it for testing?
Currently, we generate .png images from their source .odg files
(OpenOffice), and these .png are used both for the pdf documentation and the
html documentation.
But .png images are not vector images and sometimes they look blurred or
with pixels in the pdf documentation.
A better quality can be obt
22 matches
Mail list logo
