krulwich@ils.nwu.edu (Bruce Krulwich) (06/19/91)
Page 91 of the LaTeX book says in discussing \newpage:
To generate a blank page, you must put some invisible
text on it, such as an empty \mbox.
I've been including postscript into LaTeX documents, and it seems that a
\special (which includes postscript, such as \special{psfile=...} under DVIPS)
is not enough to force a blank page. Thus, if I want a page with only a
postscript figure on it, I have to add an empty mbox.
This seems wrong -- it seems to me that a \special should be considered
"potential text" for the purposes of \newpage.
Has this been discussed before? Is there a reason for it to be the way it is?
Bruce Krulwich
krulwich@ils.nwu.edu
eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (06/20/91)
krulwich@ils.nwu.edu (Bruce Krulwich) writes: >Page 91 of the LaTeX book says in discussing \newpage: > To generate a blank page, you must put some invisible > text on it, such as an empty \mbox. >I've been including postscript into LaTeX documents, and it seems that a >\special (which includes postscript, such as \special{psfile=...} under DVIPS) >is not enough to force a blank page. Thus, if I want a page with only a >postscript figure on it, I have to add an empty mbox. >This seems wrong -- it seems to me that a \special should be considered >"potential text" for the purposes of \newpage. >Has this been discussed before? Is there a reason for it to be the way it is? This is a technical issue. There has to be at least one box or rule on the page. Specials, like marks, are just information between the lines as far as TeX is concerned. The definition of \special even says that it shouldn't change the cursor position to ensure compatibility between device drivers, even if they don't support the special in question. And I think there are good arguments against considering specials as 'potential text'. How about a special that tells your postscript engine to swithc to a different colour? or to switch to another gray tone? That is not text. Victor.