xfig device (was [Rd] Re: [R] MetaPost device?)

Peter Dalgaard BSA p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk
08 Apr 2000 11:37:19 +0200

Prof Brian D Ripley <ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk> writes:

> > the length of "threshold" in the relevant font... Of course you could
> Do you mean *width* of "threshold"?  

Um, yes. The *length* is 9, I suppose.

> > (potentially) get the driver to output actual TeX, but then you have
> > no inkling about the total size of the formula object, and it comes
> > out as TeX code inside XFig. Xfig is pretty much geared towards
> > postscript fonts, so I suppose the most practical thing to do is to
> > assume PS as the final target and accept the approximations caused by
> > the screen fonts while previewing. 
> I think I said that in part of my posting which you omitted!

So you did. (I must have woken up too early today...) What I forgot to
add was something to the effect that as long as you keep formulas as
"compound objects" in XFig then it shouldn't be a major obstacle to
moving the labels around.

> R currently seems to ignore kerning in computing string dimensions.

..which we should probably fix at some point. Can't be that hard?
(BTW, I forget whether Postscript itself does kerning by default or
one has to use a special string operator to obtain it?)

Also, I suspect that some of the finer points of the Appendix G of the
TeXbook are getting lost -- the micro-spacing in formulas appear to be
not quite right.

   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard@biostat.ku.dk)             FAX: (+45) 35327907
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch