Am 30.04.2010 um 10:59 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
Does the starred form perform better? Does it work better when you
give the maximal height or width?
--
Greetings?
Pete
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
On 30-04-2010 10:22, Peter Dyballa wrote:
But I think it is a flaw.
Which proof do you have?
Are you requesting a proof of an opinion? That's rather strange, but I
will do my best.
Please consider again this file:
\documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{book}
\usepackage[frenchb]{babel}
On 30-04-2010 10:49, Peter Dyballa wrote:
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
Does the starred form perform better?
No. I get the same message.
Does it work better when you give the maximal height or width?
If you mean using the \resizebox command, yes, it does work. Thanks.
Am 30.04.2010 um 12:15 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
Does it work better when you give the maximal height or width?
If you mean using the \resizebox command, yes, it does work. Thanks.
No, I thought of:
\includegraphics[height=96mm]{Kollaps.jpg}
--
Greetings
Pete
Ce qui été
** José Carlos Santos [2010-04-30 11:09:30 +0100]:
On 30-04-2010 10:22, Peter Dyballa wrote:
But I think it is a flaw.
Which proof do you have?
Are you requesting a proof of an opinion? That's rather strange, but
I will do my best.
Please consider again this file:
On 4/30/2010 1:56 AM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Since no sophisticated solution appeared (or occurred to me), I shall
do that. But I think it is a flaw.
You don't need a sophisticated solution when the simple one is the only
correct one. In the old days we had to worry about which character
Am Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:59:13 +0100 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
Hi all,
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
\end{document}
with PDFLaTeX, then all goes well. But if I use XeLaTeX instead,
On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:59 AM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Hi all,
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
\end{document}
with PDFLaTeX, then all goes well. But if I use XeLaTeX instead, then
I
Am Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:54:59 +0100 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
I have participated in discussions both on newsgroups and on mailing
lists for ten years and I don't remember having ever been so attacked as
now.
Sometimes people can be a bit abrasive. This are normally what gives IT a
bad
Am Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:42:11 +0200 schrieb Peter Dyballa:
The command \XeTeXinputencoding resets the default UTF-8 or UTF-16
input encoding to something else, restricted, awkward, whatever. It
allows XeTeX to translate the limited characters to sensible Unicode
(BTW, MS Windows has
Am Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:03:29 +0200 schrieb Peter Dyballa:
My guess is that what happens is the a consequence of the presence
of the line
\XeTeXdefaultencoding cp1252
is that the .toc file doesn't get written in unicode. Am I right?
No. It just tells XeTeX that the source code is not the
On 30-04-2010 12:28, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
\end{document}
with PDFLaTeX, then all goes well. But if I use XeLaTeX instead, then
I get this:
use Figura_3-1.jpg
On 30-04-2010 12:07, Peter Dyballa wrote:
And all because I wanted to use a certain encoding instead of another
one! Besides, this has nothing to do with what I wish or do not wish
to do, since I am trying to compile a multi-chapter document in which
each of the 15 chapters was written by a
On Apr 30, 2010, at 8:55 AM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
On 30-04-2010 12:28, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{Figura_3-1.jpg}
\end{document}
with PDFLaTeX, then all goes well. But
Am 30.04.2010 um 16:01 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
But I *am* using only font for text.
So it should be as easy to use only one text encoding.
--
Greetings
Pete
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night, but set a man on
fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Hi all (yes, it's me again!):
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\pagestyle{empty}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\begin{document}
---
\end{document}
with XeLaTeX, then I get a PDF file which contains a single character,
namely an em-dash. But if
On 30-04-2010 13:31, Philiрp Rеichmuth wrote:
I have participated in discussions both on newsgroups and on mailing
lists for ten years and I don't remember having ever been so attacked as
now.
Sometimes people can be a bit abrasive. This are normally what gives IT a
bad name. Try not to care
On Apr 30, 2010, at 10:16 AM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Hi all (yes, it's me again!):
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\pagestyle{empty}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\begin{document}
---
\end{document}
with XeLaTeX, then I get a PDF file
Am Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:55:06 +0100 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
This is XeTeX, Version 3.1415926-2.2-0.9995.1 (MiKTeX 2.8)
So, it is a slightly more recent version than yours (and the problem
might lie there).
No, I can reproduce your problem with miktex 2.7 too.
Your picture is 1886
On 4/30/2010 7:29 AM, Alan Munn wrote:
On Apr 30, 2010, at 10:16 AM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Hi all (yes, it's me again!):
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\pagestyle{empty}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\begin{document}
---
\end{document}
Am 30.04.2010 um 15:55 schrieb José Carlos Santos:
http://www.fc.up.pt/mp/jcsantos/imagens/Figura_3-1.JPG
It also contains an useless sRGB profile while it's only black and
white. Looks like a candidate for TikZ/PGF... Or is the handwriting
important?
--
Greetings
Pete
A TRUE
No, I can reproduce your problem with miktex 2.7 too.
Your picture is 1886 pixel wide and declares its resolution to be
600 dpi. This gives a natural width of 8cm and this width you get
with pdflatex.
But xetex seems not to take the resolution into account but use a
resolution of 72 dpi. This
On 30-04-2010 15:59, Peter Dyballa wrote:
http://www.fc.up.pt/mp/jcsantos/imagens/Figura_3-1.JPG
It also contains an useless sRGB profile while it's only black and
white. Looks like a candidate for TikZ/PGF... Or is the handwriting
important?
I don't know. It's the author of the chapter
On 30-04-2010 15:29, Alan Munn wrote:
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\pagestyle{empty}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\begin{document}
---
\end{document}
with XeLaTeX, then I get a PDF file which contains a single character,
namely an
On 30-04-2010 15:35, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
This is XeTeX, Version 3.1415926-2.2-0.9995.1 (MiKTeX 2.8)
So, it is a slightly more recent version than yours (and the problem
might lie there).
No, I can reproduce your problem with miktex 2.7 too.
Your picture is 1886 pixel wide and declares its
Hi,
Try
\setmainfont[Mapping=tex-text]{Arial}
Best regards,
António Fernandes
On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:16 PM, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Hi all (yes, it's me again!):
If I compile this file:
\documentclass{article}
\pagestyle{empty}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
Juan Acevedo writes:
However, I think after I did this job we have had a major TeXLive move
in the hyphenation files towards UTF8,
and I could not tell about possible impact.
At around the same time when transition took place there has been a version
change in patterns (from version 4 to 5 if
On 30 Apr 2010, at 11:09, José Carlos Santos wrote:
Please consider again this file:
\documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{book}
\usepackage[frenchb]{babel}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\begin{document}
\frontmatter
\tableofcontents
\XeTeXinputencoding
28 matches
Mail list logo
