[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] [ox-latex] Bad default value for image width?
From: |
Rasmus |
Subject: |
Re: [O] [ox-latex] Bad default value for image width? |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Apr 2013 19:23:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
Nicolas,
Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
>> It's a bad default for
>> - Picture smaller than textwidth
>> - Picture crafted to the document which shouldn't have a width.
>>
>> It's a decent solution for
>> - pictures which are unintentionally larger than textwidth. But IMO
>> it's my responsibility, and not Org's, to fix these
>> images/situations.
>
> Exactly.
>
> I'm not selling you the default value as the perfect solution: it isn't,
> obviously. I even agree that in most situations, no default value is
> better.
Agree.
> However, in my experience, the worst situation is the image (much)
> larger than textwidth, which makes it difficult to even read the
> produced document. It isn't as bad for enlarged small pictures.
Perhaps. I'm not convinced. If the float width is removed I can
change the default and never be affected by these design choices and
it's all good.
> Now, the ".7\textwidth" for floats is harder to explain. I don't feel
> very strong about it, and I don't mind removing it (meaning
> `org-latex-image-default-width' would also apply
> to floats).
Using org-latex-image-default-width is more reasonable IMO. Then at
least there won't be any 'nasty' surprises when adding caption and for
me I can set the default width to "" and be done with it.
For people who use it it might also be reasonable to introduce a
org-latex-wrap-image-default-width or making
org-latex-image-default-width a list ordered by type of element/float
type.
E.g. '((float . ".9\\textwidth") (wrap . ".5\\textwidth")). . .
>> I like the "" better. It works better with my "intuitive logic".
>
> I have pushed a patch which should fix your initial problem about :width
> "" not being taken into account. Could you confirm the new behaviour
> works as expected?
I'll check it out and report back. I can't access git from this
network (high port numbers are blocked for "security" reasons) so I'll
only try it out later.
Thanks,
Rasmus.
--
Hooray!