DOCBOOK-APPS: Re: Ignoring image widths in HTML--a solution

[Jens Emmerich <Jens.Emmerich@encorus.com>]

On the dual resolution approach:

We solved the problem of handling many images by creating
high-but-welldefined resolution "originals" (PNGs) and rescale then
via convert (belonging to ImageMagick) automatically, driven by a
Makefile. Depending on the target (Web or Print) we use different
scale factors. We put the formatted documents into seperate target
directories and don't use any width specification at all. Sometimes
not perfect and quite slow, but satisfactory.

Jens

Camille Bégnis <camille@mandrakesoft.com> writes:

> Dennis Grace wrote:
>  > A couple weeks back, Camille posed this question:

[...]

> the resolution trick is brilliant. Though it is not an option when you
> have more than one thousand images...
> 
>  > So far, my best solution has been external to DocBook. In GIMP or
>  > PhotoShop, I can alter the resolution to find the optimum pixels/inch
>  > (pixels/mm) for a given size. An image that looks good in the browser at,
>  > say, 640 pixels wide will--at a resolution of 72 pixels/inch (2.8346
>  > pixels/mm)--be too wide (8.9 in[225.8 mm]) for standard page outputs.
>  > Resetting the resolution to 110 pixels/inch (4.33 pixels/mm) reduces the
>  > print version to a printable width of 5.8 in ( 147.8 cm) while retaining
>  > the total pixel width unaffected for HTML output.
>  >
>  > Dennis Grace
>  >
>  > Information Developer
>  > IBM Linux Technology Center
>  > (512) 838-3937  T/L 678-3937  cell: (512)-296-7830
>  > dgrace@us.ibm.com