spieker@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de (Peter Spieker AG Richter) (06/28/90)
We're using FIG v2.0 Protocol v1.4X (X11 patchlevel 5) (resp. FIG v2.0 Protocol v2.0 (X11 patchlevel 7)) to create nice pictures for our LaTeX-documents. But when we make boxes with pieces of text inside the result printed out with eepic will be different from the original one in FIG. The text doesn't fit into the boxes! The fonts used by FIG seem to be different from those used by (La)TeX. Any suggestions?! Thanks Peter =================================================================== Peter Spieker Universitaet Kaiserslautern Fachbereich Informatik Postfach 3049 D-6750 Kaiserslautern FRG uucp: spieker@informatik.uni-kl.de
beck@kazoo.cs.cornell.edu (Micah Beck) (06/28/90)
spieker@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de (Peter Spieker AG Richter) writes: >We're using FIG v2.0 Protocol v1.4X (X11 patchlevel 5) >(resp. FIG v2.0 Protocol v2.0 (X11 patchlevel 7)) to >create nice pictures for our LaTeX-documents. But when >we make boxes with pieces of text inside the result printed >out with eepic will be different from the original one in FIG. >The text doesn't fit into the boxes! The fonts used by FIG seem >to be different from those used by (La)TeX. Most WYSIWYG editors suffer from this problem to some extent, since interpretation for the screen and interpretation for output are done by different pieces of code. Fig has greater problems since it is not as precisely defined as DVI or PostScript. Fonts are the worst problem, since "12pt Roman" is a very imprecise specification. If you send me an example I'll see if anything can be adjusted to make the match closer. However, to some extent the WYSMRYOWYG (What you see may remind you of what you'll get) nature of Fig is necessary to allow easy translation to many output forms (see my paper on TransFig in the forthcoming proceedings of the TUG '90 conference). /micah