OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oiic-formation-discuss message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] My perspective. display perferct?

On Monday 30. June 2008 12:44:37 Dave Pawson wrote:
> I'm focussing on 'pixel perfect' simply because it is
> seen as an issue here, i.e. I see no consensus or definition.
> Simpler compliance is not an issue, but equally important.
> 2008/6/30 Thomas Zander <zander@kde.org>:
> >> How would you define an objective test for measuring +-2pt?
> >> Is that practical?
> >> This seems to be moving towards 'pixel perfect' which seemed
> >> to be impractical.
> >
> > 2 pt equals 0.7 millimeters, that's a pretty objective measurement
> > IMOHO... Just set the display to 100% and grab your ruler. (or 200% and
> > measure it to be 1.4mm if you want it to be more accurate)
> I'm not familiar with the issues, but surely screen resolution comes into
> this? My 12 inch screen or your 36 inch screen?

pt (aka postscript points) is a real-world value, it can be converted into 
centimeters. The size or DPI of your screen is irrelevant in that 
calculation, any word processor is suppost to take those into account.
I mean; on paper you have 300 DPI, and you want WYSIWYG.

> > I must be missing something, since this sounds easy to me :)
> I'm led to believe it is not.

I'd love to be educated, but in my experience its not hard to *test*. We are 
mimicking 600 years of experience in printing press in computers, afterall.
Its just hard to understand the concepts and implementation details.

> > I'm defining 'correct' as following the rules, either from ODF or from
> > the specifications ODF leans on. Which includes the typographical rules.
> I'll agree if they are explicitly referenced. Otherwise no.
> Your assumptions won't agree with others.
> >> If we can call up typography references without it being in the spec
> >> we can call up anything?
> >> -1
> >
> > Its not like there are a dozen ways to do correct typography ;) So, I
> > disagree with you here.
> I'd presume to say that you don't agree with the rest of the worlds
> typographers Thomas? Hence to assume correct typography is
> generally agreed is ... presumptious?
> Even 12 ways is too many for a specification?

If you disagree that typography is a science that has been researched for 
various hundreds of years, then, sure, we have a problem in ODF.
In my experience there is not that much flexibility in interpretation.

> Provide a means of sharing documents between users without frustration
> on their part.

To be clear, there are a lot of concepts to be tested that make the layouting 
quite different between implementations. Linespacing being one of them. They 
should be done correctly.  We should determine the correct font that is used 
and we should test that paragraph-space-before (fo:margin-top) and after are 
added instead of merged (an issue in ODF some years back).
If we manage to check off those and similar issues, we come close.  Those 
things I agree are important.

You don't need pixel precision to reach your goals.
Thomas Zander

This is a digitally signed message part.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]