[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Porrectus (continued)
From: |
Rune Zedeler |
Subject: |
Re: Porrectus (continued) |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:39:24 +0100 |
Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> > Well, the blot-diameter actually should depend on the resolution - but
> > is that possible?
>
> In metafont that's automatic, I guess. But what we do in postscript
> should be linked to that... There are more of this kind of problems,
> stem thickness is another problem.
Yes. We have to figure this out before someone starts hacking in Jurgens
first patch.
Btw I'm making quite some changes atm, hopefully it's okay to add them
upon Jurgens patch? (As I said, currently in 600dpi there is no
difference between the feta-whole rest and the simple \vrule-whole rest
- both are perfect rectangles).
-Rune
- Re: [PATCH] Porrectus (continued), Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/01/02
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Rune Zedeler, 2002/01/02
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/01/03
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Juergen Reuter, 2002/01/04
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/01/04
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Rune Zedeler, 2002/01/07
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/01/08
- Re: Porrectus (continued),
Rune Zedeler <=
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2002/01/16
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2002/01/31
- Re: Porrectus (continued), Rune Zedeler, 2002/01/31