UKTeX Digest Friday, 5 Apr 1991 Volume 91 : Issue 14 Today's Topics: Primary device-independent representation for graphs RE: Primary device-independent representation for graphs RE: Primary device-independent representation for graphs RE: Splitting ZIP files Re: Splitting ZIP files Re: Printing wide text on wide-carriage dot-matrix printers Administrivia: Moderators: Peter Abbott (Aston University) and David Osborne (University of Nottingham) Contributions: UKTeX@uk.ac.tex Administration, subscription and unsubscription requests: UKTeX-request@uk.ac.tex ------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 22:58:34 +0000 From: CCZDGR@UK.AC.NOTTINGHAM.CCC.VAX Subject: Primary device-independent representation for graphs Many documents require not only text, but also graphics (e.g. a figure showing a graph). For graphics, it seems A GOOD THING to have a representation of the graph that is device-independent. Then the graph can be previewed on one device and "plotted" on another. To date, I have assumed that "encapsulated PostScript" is the most relevant device-independent way of representing graphs. Graphics software usually gives PostScript as an output option (although not always encapsulated). Providing output is going to a PostScript device via some suitable dvi-to-... software, one can get such graphs into TeX-ed documents by using \special. There are devices on the market that can draw PostScript on a screen, so these can (in theory) provide previewing for the graphics. However, a lot of effort seems to be going into CGM. I see, for example, that Rutherford-Appleton are offering the RAL-CGM system free to the UK academic community. RAL-CGM gives the prospect of graphics previewing on Tektronix 42xx terminals, hence (presumably) via the Emutek emulator on a PC. I have the impression that devices that can preview CGM are likely to be less "thin on the ground" than devices that can preview PostScript. If this impression is correct, one may be more likely to find a suitable device for previewing a CGM file than to find a suitable device for previewing an EPS file (making CGM a more attractive device-independent form than EPS at the preview stage). However, if CGM were the primary device-independent representation for graphs, then with current dvi-to-printer software, the user would presumably have to do the CGM-to-EPS conversion themselves (using e.g. the RAL software) and use \special to specify the file of EPS (making CGM a less attractive device-independent form than EPS at the printing stage). Would anyone care to comment on whether, for graphs that are to appear in TeX-ed documents, it is likely to be better, in practice, to regard EPS or CGM as the primary device-independent representation of the graph? If CGM is likely to be preferable [e.g. because of greater availability of previewing screens, and existence of RAL conversion software] (a) in theory, could someone write a dvi-to-printer command that allowed a \special which specified a file of CGM code [with the dvi-to-printer command doing any conversion e.g. to EPS] (b) if so, is there any prospect that anyone will actually write such software? David Rhead ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Apr 91 10:44:51 +0000 From: P.TAYLOR@UK.AC.RHBNC.VAX Subject: RE: Primary device-independent representation for graphs >>> If this impression is correct, one may be more likely >>> to find a suitable device for previewing a CGM file than to find a >>> suitable device for previewing an EPS file (making CGM a more attractive >>> device-independent form than EPS at the preview stage). I think you should not ignore the existence of GhostScript, a remarkably accurate public-domain implementation of P*stScr*pt available in source form and compilable under and for many common operating systems, including MS/DOS and VAX/VMS. I can preview PostScript files on my PS/2 ten times faster than a dedicated PostScript printer (with Adobe interpreter) can reproduce them. >>> Would anyone care to comment on whether, for graphs that are to appear >>> in TeX-ed documents, it is likely to be better, in practice, to >>> regard EPS or CGM as the primary device-independent representation of >>> the graph? I'd go for EPS. ** Phil. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Apr 91 12:08:00 +0000 From: MALCOLMC@UK.AC.PCL.MOLE Subject: RE: Primary device-independent representation for graphs to muddy the EPS/CGM waters a little. at least CGM is a purported standard, which can be generated and interchanged between many operating systems/applications. EPS has a definition, and an emasculated version, without the fonts and the programming (what's left?) will become the SPDL standard sometime soonish, so it will become a standard. what about IGES? in 1989 TUGboat there was a description of a driver which would accept CGM: worked on vaxes and unix i think (?andrews). i talked to pat wilcox about having Metaplot accept CGM input. she didn't think it would be difficult, and of course it solves all your problems, at a stroke! my own worry about both EPS and CGM is the difficulty of having the lettering look right -- matching the body text. malcolm ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 09:00:00 +0000 From: MALCOLMC@UK.AC.PCL.MOLE Subject: RE: Splitting ZIP files yes, you have missed something. unless you can do your programming in TeX (or LaTeX), then your recipient may not have any of the appropriate tools or skills to `write a simple program'. a prayer: please let me never see phrases like ``a simple unix script'', or a ``simple program''. thank you DEK. malcolm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Apr 91 15:35:25 +0100 From: MATTES%DE.UNI-STUTTGART.INFORMATIK.AZU@UK.AC.NSFNET-RELAY Subject: Re: Splitting ZIP files > What we were planning to do was to split up the ZIP files into smaller > ZIP files, each containing part of the original ZIP file, so that the > emTeX files may be distributed on even (a lot of) 360kB disks. > [...] > I have a program (ZIPsplit) which analyses a ZIP archive and creates new > ZIP archives that contain a subset of the original ZIP archive's files > such that the new ZIP archives are no larger than a given size. > [...] > We want to keep as much as possible to the format provided by Eberhard > Mattes. Perhaps the answer is to ask him to put emTeX into smaller ZIP > files? All emTeX ZIP files are smaller than 360 KB. I've never put fli files into ZIPs. Therefore, you can compress and split the fli files the way you want. The next emTeX release will be archived with ARJ, which can split and compresses better than pkzip. Eberhard Mattes ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Apr 91 15:43:47 +0100 From: MATTES%DE.UNI-STUTTGART.INFORMATIK.AZU@UK.AC.NSFNET-RELAY Subject: Re: Printing wide text on wide-carriage dot-matrix printers > I just tried emTeX's DVIDOT, which seemed to want to do the job, but was > aware of the 1920px max width of an Epson FX (only printer around right > now) and thus gagged. Does anyone know of a printer/dvidriver combo > which will satisfy this need? It seems that the printers, despite > their wide carriage, cannot handle graphics lines wider than 8truein. Use dvidot fx100, it can handle a width of 13.6truein. If you need more (and have an appropriate printer), you can create a new .dot file with a higher limit. Eberhard Mattes ------------------------------ UK TeX ARCHIVE at ASTON UNIVERSITY *** JANET Interactive and NIFTP access *** Host: uk.ac.tex (JANET DTE 000020120091) Username: public Password: public *** FILES OF INTEREST *** [tex-archive]00readme.txt [tex-archive]00directory.list [tex-archive]00directory.size [tex-archive]00directory_dates.list [tex-archive]00last30days.files This year's UKTeX back issues are stored in the archive, in directory [tex-archive.digests.uktex.91] This year's TeXhax back issues are stored in the archive, in directory [tex-archive.digests.texhax.91] Latest TeXhax: #16 TeXMaG back issues are stored in the archive, in directory [tex-archive.digests.tex-mag] Latest TeXMaG: V5 N2 *** MEDIA DISTRIBUTIONS *** Washington Unix tape (28 March 1990) TeX 2.993(==3.0), LaTeX 2.09, Metafont 1.9 (2.0) Unix 4.2/3BSD & System V. Tar 1600bpi, blockfactor 20, 1 file. Requires one 2400' tape with return labels AND return postage. VMS backup of the archive requires two 2400' tapes at 6250bpi. VMS backup of TeX 2.991 plus PSprint requires one tape. Exabyte 8mm tapes: same formats available as 1/2in tapes. The following tapes are available: SONY Video 8 cassette P5 90MP, MAXELL Video 8 cassette P5-90, TDK Video 8 cassette P5-90MPB OzTeX (for Macintosh): Send 10 UNFORMATTED 800K disks with return postage. emTeX (for MS-DOS): Send 11 UNFORMATTED 1.44Mb or 18 (EIGHTEEN!) 720K 3.5" disks; or 12 UNFORMATTED 5.25" disks; with return postage. emTeX is now distributed with a copy of `Baskerville' and documentation. Please therefore send the disks in packing of A4 size or enclose an A4 envelope. *** POSTAGE RATES *** (all prices in Pounds Sterling) (make cheques payable to Aston University) 0.5" tapes: UK: 2.50 (one tape), 5.00 (two tapes). Europe: 5.00 (one tape), 9.00 (two tapes). Outside Europe please enquire. 8mm tapes: UK: 1.00, Europe: 2.00. DC600A cartridges: UK: 1.00, Europe: 2.00. Diskettes: Quantity/Size Europe World UK 1st UK 2nd 18/3.5" 3.10 5.10 1.40 1.10 11/3.5" 1.80 2.90 0.80 0.65 18/5.25" 1.20 2.00 0.60 0.50 11/5.25" 0.80 1.30 0.50 0.35 *** POSTAL ADDRESS *** (Please include SELF-ADDRESSED ADHESIVE LABELS for return postage). Peter Abbott Computing Service, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham B4 7ET *** UK TeX USERS GROUP *** For details, contact Malcolm Clark or Geeti Granger IRS John Wiley & Sons Polytechnic of Central London Baffins Lane 115 New Cavendish Street Chichester London W1M 8JS W Sussex PO19 1UD email: malcolmc@uk.ac.pcl.mole End of UKTeX Digest [Volume 91 Issue 14] ****************************************