Re: [Groff] Re: grn problems with xditview

[Daniel Senderowicz]

Werner,

>> Incidentally, I also checked this upgraded code with xditpsview and
>> although it looks good in terms of the line thickness, the position
>> of the whole figure is different from what the 'ps' output is.
>> Check it out.
>
>Indeed, it is incorrectly positioned.  I strongly believe that it is
>possible to remove the dependency on `res' completely (which is the
>culprit, I think) --

The difference between the xpsditview and ps outputs seems to be
significantly larger than any error that the usage of 'res' would
cause. It's about 1 cm more to the left.

I don't know exactly how a gremlin graphics file
>must look like (BTW, it might me a good idea to add a section to
>grn.man, documenting the format), but I can imagine that

I have a document quite thick that has a tutorial and a
description of the gremlin file format. Unfortunately I don't
have it in a computer form. Give me a snail mail address and I
send it to you.

I noticed that you left in the man page the -s flag, isn't it
more confusing than deleting it or changing to something else?
Don't forget that if you use the -s flag to shaded polygons won't
come out. In any case, the most useful feature would be to have
the capability of overlapping patterns on top of polygons, if you
don't want them, just don't draw them.

>device-independent code for groff solves this problem also.
>
>In case you do some work towards this direction, please send patches
>relative to groff's grn version.

I will.

>I've applied your patches, slightly modified -- check for the
>BASE_THICKNESS macro.
>
>What do you think about adding a grn command to adjust BASE_THICKNESS?

grn has already the option of adjusting the line thickness
individually, that is a more flexible feature (thick = x, narrow
= y, etc.). What I would have is an option to change it at
compile time in case some new device starts acting up. So I
would do:

#ifndef BASE_THICKNESS
#def BASE_THICKNESS 0.15
#endif

Dan