Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.3DBD618C@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:41:46 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3DBD618C" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil t t nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Line-art, half-tones, associated captions/legends/"sources" Date: Wed, 20 Feb 1991 01:29:34 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Sender: To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 291 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3DBD618C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BACKGROUND There was a meeting called "LaTeX3 and you" on 14th Feb. It had been convened as part of Frank and Rainer's visit to London. One of the topics discussed at the meeting was the idea of catering for "floats" whose width may be more (e.g. if the text is being typeset in 2 columns) or less (e.g. if 2 narrow illustrations will fit horizontally = next to each other) than the width of the text-column. Some notes of ideas were distributed, but I'm afraid that I don't have time to type them in here. HART'S RULES Hart and his successors at Oxford University Press have attempted to write down some of their experience of how to deal with such things: "Hart's Rules [for Compositors and Readers at the University Press Oxford]", 39th edition, Oxford University Press, 1983. ISBN 0-19-212983-X. I'll summarise Hart's recommendations, but first I'll explain the terminology (in case anyone else reads Hart's Rules and is as puzzled as I was at first): Opening - A 2-page spread. Block - "a relief printing surface from which line-art, half-tones, etc. can be printed". The term comes from the wood blocks in which illustrations used to be cut. (I guess that the analogue these days would be the "bounding box" for a file of encapsulated PostScript.) Underline - A line [of text] underneath a block (NOT an \hrule = underneath a line of text). Thus, I think Hart's Rules uses "underline" to mean what the Chicago Manual of Style would call "caption plus legend" and what LaTeX 2.09 might call a \caption. The "underline" might contain an acknowledgement of a source. Illustration - A block plus its underline. I.e., in LaTeX 2.09 terms, the stuff that might go in \begin{figure} ... \end{figure}. Here's my interpretation of Hart's Rules about how one should try to float illustrations [where (a), (b), etc. are Hart's letters]: (a) Keep the illustration on the same 2-page spread as the reference to it as far as possible. (b) If an illustration takes half-a-page (vertically) or less, it should be placed slightly above the centre of the page, with text above and below. (I.e., in LaTeX 2.09 terms, there should be an alternative to [t], [b] and [h] that gives "slightly above the centre of the page". It might need to try to avoid splitting paragraphs: see notes about Williamson, below.) (c) If an illustration takes more than half a page, put it at the top or bottom of a page (preferably the top), but don't ever put less than 5 lines of text on a page. (d) For a pair of full-width illustrations that have to appear in the = same 2-page spread: if the depth allows, they can be put together on a = page; if not, they can be placed as for (b) or (c). Hart's Rules gives an example (figure 2) that has the following arrangement for a = 2-page spread: ILLUSTRATION TEXT TEXT ILLUSTRATION (e) If 3 full-width illustrations have to be fitted onto a 2-page = spread, put 2 on one page and the third on the other with some text (minimum 4 lines) on the other. (f) Hart's (f) deals with "running text around a narrow illustration", which is probably outside the scope of LaTeX 3.0. However, it does mention typesetting underlines (i.e. caption + legend, etc.) "to the width of the illustration", which may be a requirement to bear in mind. (g) If a "block" (i.e., piece of artwork) is narrow, move the underline (i.e., caption + legend) to the side of the block, so as to avoid having to run text around an illustration (i.e., narrow artwork with narrow caption underneath). If you do this, the alignment of the caption is to the top/bottom of the block depending on whether the illustration is at the top/bottom of the page. (h) If the width of an an illustration is less than full-width but = greater than full-width/2, centre it horizontally, and typeset the underline (i.e., caption + legend) to the width of the block (e.g., artwork) (if it's a long underline) or centre it (if it's a short one). (i) This deals with illustrations that are too wide. (j) This deals with spacing around a block (e.g., artwork) (k) This deals with spacing above/below the underline (i.e. caption + legend). (l) TWO ILLUSTRATIONS THAT ARE EACH LESS THAN HALF THE TEXT-WIDTH ARE TO BE PLACED SIDE-BY-SIDE. (m) WHEN TWO ILLUSTRATIONS (of "not too dissimilar depth") ARE PLACED SIDE-BY-SIDE, THEY ARE TO BE PLACED VERTICALLY SO THAT EITHER THE BASES OF THE BLOCKS (E.G. ARTWORK) ARE LEVEL OR THE BASES OF THE UNDERLINE (I.E. CAPTION + LEGEND) ARE LEVEL. (n) This deals with running heads. (o) This deals with landscape. (p) "FOR MULTI-COLUMN MAKE-UP, THE ORDER OF ILLUSTRATIONS IS TO BE MAINTAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE". I'm not sure what this means. It seems to allow both Fig 1. Text Fig 2. Text Text Text and Fig 1. Fig 2. Text Text Text Text (q) This deals with making the underline (i.e. caption plus legend) slightly less wide than the block (e.g. artwork), if such adjustment is necessary to improve the appearance of the underline. OTHER GURUS Leslie Lamport & Margery Cantor Appended to the notes distributed on the 14th was some mail >from Leslie to Frank about a conversation with a Margery Cantor. She suggested aligning the tops of figures [whereas Hart suggests aligning the bottom of the (wood-)block or the bottom of the underline (e.g. caption + legend)]. Leslie also suggested a few other things, in particular, that the user will have to arrange for a figure to have a certain width, perhaps by using a minipage. Ruari McLean On page 137 of "The Thames and Hudson Manual of Typography" Thames and Hudson, 1980, ISBN 0-5000-68022-1, Ruari McLean suggests the following: If a book consists of a number of text pages ... and the pages include a number of squared-up illustrations, all different = shapes, the unity of the book is immediately threatened. The = illustrations should all have the same width as the type area ... If they can also, with captions, make the same depth as the text, so much the better ... If a book is designed with wide foredge margins, and it is strongly desirable to make an illustration wider than the type measure, it can be taken into the margin, provided it is conspicuously wider than the text; but if it is done more than once, the larger illustrations should all be of the same width. ... metal blocks ... flanges of about 1/8 in ... Half-tone illustrations ... illustration area in harmony with the type area ... ... undesirable to lay down a set of rules ... But a few "rules of thumb" are helpful ... If two pictures are to be placed one above the other, they should either be identical in width or conspicuously different. If they are unavoidably of nearly the same width, they should not be aligned on one side, but placed full out to left and right respectively, so that the comparison is not obvious. Hugh Williamson In chapter 14 of "Book Design", Yale University Press, 1983, ISBN 0-300-03035-5, Hugh Williamson suggests the following: If a designer and illustrator can agree on the dimensions of pictures before work begins, both the typography of the book and its illustrations are the more likely to succeed. ... When ... full-page illustrations vary in depth, a standard position for the last line of the caption, perhaps aligned with the last line of text on a full page, ... , even at the expense of varying distances between caption and picture. ... When a picture and a long caption are to share the area allocated to illustration, the dimensions of the picture may depend on those of the caption, ... way to determine illustration size will be to have such captions set ... first. ... A conspicuously rectangular illustration, ... , is usually placed with one or more of its edges in exact alignment with other elements of the opening. ... act of reading favoured by placing the illustration between two paragraphs ... to divide a word immediately before and after an illustration is clumsy. ... Captions often look neatest when they are no wider than the illustration under which they are to appear. John Miles In "Design for Desktop Publishing" (Gordon Fraser, 1987, ISBN = 0-86092-097-6), John Miles gives some examples of grid-based designs, e.g., an A3 design that has 5 columns each of 12pc with a 1pc gutter between each column (page 38). Presumably, such a design will work best if artwork is supplied 12pc, 25pc, 38pc, 51pc or 64pc wide. IMPLICATIONS I don't say that the opinions of Hart, McLean, Williamson, etc. = represent "what LaTeX 3.0 should do". But their opinions seem to represent the sort of thing that LaTeX 3.0 should allow a designer to implement. = To this end, it seems to me desirable that LaTeX 3.0 and the designer = should be working in terms of the same concepts. From the above, it appears that the following concepts may be = fundamental: In old-fashioned terms "the positions of the edges of the wood/metal = block holding line-art or half-tone" or, in PostScript terms, "the bounding box for the file of encapsulated PostScript that is being \special-ed in at this point to define some artwork" The designer may have a preference about the sizes of illustrations that are to be allowed. The artwork may have to be scaled/cropped to = be one of a designer-approved set of sizes (or widths). The width of the underline (=3D caption + legend =3D 2.09 \caption) may depend on the width of the ("wood or metal") block or EPS bounding box (e.g. artwork) [or occasionally vice versa]. The underline (=3D caption + legend =3D 2.09 \caption) may need to move (e.g. to the side of the artwork) if the artwork is narrow. Alternatively (Williamson), a caption might move to be aligned with the bottom of the last line of text on a full page. The underline may actually contain: a caption; a legend; details of = source. They may need to be distinguished typographically. LaTeX may need "to know" the height and width of the artwork (i.e., height/width of wood/metal block, or EPS bounding box), so that it can align "the edges of the block" with other elements of the page. In particular, the width of the artwork may determine the width of the caption. LaTeX may also need to manipulate the underline (i.e., = 2.09 \caption) to side of page (Hart) or bottom of page (Williamson). LaTeX may need to align the {artwork + underline} by using the edges of the artwork or by using the top/bottom lines of the underline; hence LaTeX needs explicit access to these positions. I have the impression that LaTeX needs to be working in terms of: "the bounding box for the artwork"; the width of the {caption+legend+source}, the baselines of the top/bottom lines of the {caption+legend+source}. I have the impresssion that the height of the \begin{figure} ... \end{figure} and the width of an enclosed minipage are unlikely to be good enough. Therefore, it looks to me as though it would be better for the user = (guided by the designer's preferences) to declare the height/width of the = artwork (rather than the height/width of the artwork+caption) and let LaTeX work = out the height/width of the "artwork + caption" (which could conceivably = involve trying having the caption at the side of narrow artwork). Then LaTeX will "know" the width of the artwork and can, if appropriate, typeset the caption to the same width (whereas if width was specified by a minipage containing the whole lot, it might be wider than the actual artwork, and the caption might end up too wide). So I wonder whether some user interface such as the following might be appropriate: \begin{floatfig} % A golden opportunity to phase "figure" out. % My users often don't understand that it "floats" % until they see it happen, then say they don't = like % it! A more meaningful name would help = understanding. \artwork{144pt}{216pt} % Here I assume that the dvi... command \special{dvi... 144 ... 216 } % can scale, and that we want to % take advantage of this feature in this % case to scale the artwork to fit within % a 2in x 3in bounding box, perhaps = because % the designer has expressed a preference % for artwork that is 2in wide. (If not, % the user would simply specify % Xpt and Ypt in the \artwork command % where X and Y are taken from the % BoundingBox comment in the EPS file.) % A \begin{picture}(X,Y) could be used % instead of \artwork ... \special ... % if the picture environment is being = used % for a drawing. \figcaption{...} % LaTeX now knows the width of the artwork, % so can, in principle, try moving the caption % to the side of narrow artwork or typeset the % caption to the same width as the artwork. \end{floatfig} INCREASING THE PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS The discussion on the 14th postulated a situation in which it might be necessary to place arbitrary collections of figures of arbitrary size. Obviously "it would be nice" from an algorithmic point-of-view to have an algorithm than could handle such a situation. But: * In practice, a lot of placement problems may be easier than the general problem. Artwork may actually be a graph off a graph-plotter (produced using the plotting package's default plot-size and scaled using a constant factor): all plots will tend to be the same size. Photographs will tend to be supplied in standard sizes. [On the other hand, chemical artwork may tend to produce diagrams of differing sizes, because chemists may want the bond-length constant throughout the document, rather than the "structure-diagram size" constant.] * The designer may express a preference for particular sizes (or at least particular widths) for line-art, half-tones, etc. A designer might even say that "arbitrary collections of figures of arbitrary size" threaten the unity of the book (McLean). * dvi-printing commands often allow for the scaling of a \special-ed piece of artwork to a particular size. So a lesser objective than "arbitrary collections of arbitrary sizes" might deal with the most common cases (and might conceivably lead to better design). There would have to be a convention whereby the designer could pass on his/her preferences about the sizes in which artwork should be supplied. I suppose that comments in the style-file would do. For example, for Miles's A3 design, a comment in a style-file might say In this design, LaTeX's algorithm for figure-placement works best with figures that have the following widths: 12pc, 25pc, 38pc, 51pc, 64pc. In a design for a single-column book, the comment in the style-file might recommend "magic numbers" chosen as "full-width", "a bit less than half full-width" etc. Generally, the user could be told If you have a choice, we advise you to use one of the following widths for best results with this design ... Then: * users will know how to use dvi-printing commands' abilities to re-scale artwork. (Otherwise, they'd probably just use whatever size picture happens to come off their graph-plotter, out of their camera, etc.) * LaTeX is likely to get given artwork of "a recommended width" that it can make a good job of placing, since much of the testing of the placement algorithm and style-files would be with artwork of "recommended widths". David = Rhead ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3DBD618C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Line-art, half-tones, associated = captions/legends/"sources"

BACKGROUND

There was a meeting called "LaTeX3 and you" = on 14th Feb.  It had
been convened as part of Frank and Rainer's visit to = London.

One of the topics discussed at the meeting was the = idea of catering for
"floats" whose width may be more (e.g. if = the text is being typeset in
2 columns) or less (e.g. if 2 narrow illustrations = will fit horizontally next
to each other) than the width of the = text-column.  Some notes of ideas
were distributed, but I'm afraid that I don't have = time to type them in
here.

HART'S RULES

Hart and his successors at Oxford University Press = have attempted to
write down some of their experience of how to deal = with such things:
      "Hart's Rules = [for Compositors and Readers at the University
      Press Oxford]", = 39th edition, Oxford University Press, 1983.
      ISBN = 0-19-212983-X.

I'll summarise Hart's recommendations, but first I'll = explain the
terminology (in case anyone else reads Hart's Rules = and is as
puzzled as I was at first):
Opening - A 2-page spread.
Block - "a relief printing surface from which = line-art, half-tones,
      etc. can be = printed".  The term comes from the wood blocks in
      which illustrations = used to be cut.  (I guess that the analogue
      these days would be = the "bounding box" for a file of encapsulated
      PostScript.)
Underline - A line [of text] underneath a block (NOT = an \hrule underneath
      a line of text).  = Thus, I think Hart's Rules uses "underline" to
      mean what the Chicago = Manual of Style would call "caption plus
      legend" and what = LaTeX 2.09 might call a \caption.
      The = "underline" might contain an acknowledgement of a = source.
Illustration - A block plus its underline.  = I.e., in LaTeX 2.09 terms,
      the stuff that might = go in \begin{figure} ... \end{figure}.

Here's my interpretation of Hart's Rules about how one = should try to
float illustrations [where (a), (b), etc. are Hart's = letters]:
(a) Keep the illustration on the same 2-page spread = as the reference to
    it as far as possible.
(b) If an illustration takes half-a-page (vertically) = or less, it
    should be placed slightly above = the centre of the page, with
    text above and below.  (I.e., = in LaTeX 2.09 terms, there should
    be an alternative to [t], [b] and = [h] that gives "slightly
    above the centre of the = page".  It might need to try to avoid
    splitting paragraphs:  see = notes about Williamson, below.)
(c) If an illustration takes more than half a page, = put it at the top
    or bottom of a page (preferably = the top), but don't ever put less
    than 5 lines of text on a = page.
(d) For a pair of full-width illustrations that have = to appear in the same
    2-page spread:  if the depth = allows, they can  be put together on a page;
    if not, they can be placed as for = (b) or (c).  Hart's Rules gives
    an example (figure 2) that has the = following arrangement for a 2-page
    spread:
          &nbs= p; ILLUSTRATION      TEXT
          &nbs= p;    TEXT       = ILLUSTRATION
(e) If 3 full-width illustrations have to be fitted = onto a 2-page spread,
    put 2 on one page and the third on = the other with some text (minimum
    4 lines) on the other.
(f) Hart's (f) deals with "running text around a = narrow illustration",
    which is probably outside the = scope of LaTeX 3.0.  However, it
    does mention typesetting = underlines (i.e. caption + legend, etc.)
    "to the width of the = illustration", which may be a requirement
    to bear in mind.
(g) If a "block" (i.e., piece of artwork) = is narrow, move the
    underline (i.e., caption + legend) = to the side of the block,
    so as to avoid having to run text = around an illustration (i.e.,
    narrow artwork with narrow caption = underneath).
    If you do this, the alignment of = the caption is to the top/bottom
    of the block depending on whether = the illustration is at the
    top/bottom of the page.
(h) If the width of an an illustration is less than = full-width but greater
    than full-width/2, centre it = horizontally, and typeset the underline
    (i.e., caption + legend) to the = width of the block (e.g., artwork)
    (if it's a long underline) or = centre it (if it's a short one).
(i) This deals with illustrations that are too = wide.
(j) This deals with spacing around a block (e.g., = artwork)
(k) This deals with spacing above/below the underline = (i.e. caption
    + legend).
(l) TWO ILLUSTRATIONS THAT ARE EACH LESS THAN HALF = THE TEXT-WIDTH
    ARE TO BE PLACED = SIDE-BY-SIDE.
(m) WHEN TWO ILLUSTRATIONS (of "not too = dissimilar depth") ARE
    PLACED SIDE-BY-SIDE, THEY ARE TO = BE PLACED VERTICALLY SO THAT
    EITHER THE BASES OF THE BLOCKS = (E.G. ARTWORK) ARE LEVEL
    OR     THE = BASES OF THE UNDERLINE (I.E. CAPTION + LEGEND) ARE LEVEL.
(n) This deals with running heads.
(o) This deals with landscape.
(p) "FOR MULTI-COLUMN MAKE-UP, THE ORDER OF = ILLUSTRATIONS IS TO
    BE MAINTAINED WHEREVER = POSSIBLE".  I'm not sure what this means.
    It seems to allow both
      Fig 1.  = Text
      Fig 2.  = Text
       Text   = Text
    and
      Fig 1.  Fig = 2.
      Text    = Text
      Text    = Text
(q) This deals with making the underline (i.e. = caption plus legend)
    slightly less wide than the block = (e.g. artwork), if such adjustment
    is necessary to improve the = appearance of the underline.

OTHER GURUS

Leslie Lamport & Margery Cantor

Appended to the notes distributed on the 14th was some = mail
>from Leslie to Frank about a conversation with a = Margery Cantor.
She suggested aligning the tops of figures [whereas = Hart suggests
aligning the bottom of the (wood-)block or the bottom = of the
underline (e.g. caption + legend)].

Leslie also suggested a few other things, in = particular,
that the user will have to arrange for a figure to = have
a certain width, perhaps by using a minipage.

Ruari McLean

On page 137 of
      "The Thames and = Hudson Manual of Typography"
      Thames and Hudson, = 1980,  ISBN 0-5000-68022-1,
Ruari McLean suggests the following:
      If a book consists of = a number of text pages ... and the pages
      include a number of = squared-up illustrations, all different shapes,
      the unity of the book = is immediately threatened.  The illustrations
      should all have the = same width as the type area ... If they can
      also, with captions, = make the same depth as the text, so much the
      better ...
      If a book is designed = with wide foredge margins, and it is
      strongly desirable to = make an illustration wider than
      the type measure, it = can be taken into the margin, provided
      it is conspicuously = wider than the text;  but if it is done
      more than once, the = larger illustrations should all be of the
      same width.
      ... metal blocks ... = flanges of about 1/8 in ...
      Half-tone = illustrations ... illustration area in harmony with
      the type area = ...
      ... undesirable to lay = down a set of rules ... But a few "rules
      of thumb" are = helpful ...
      If two pictures are to = be placed one above the other, they
      should either be = identical in width or conspicuously different.
      If they are = unavoidably of nearly the same width, they should not
      be aligned on one = side, but placed full out to left and right
      respectively, so that = the comparison is not obvious.

Hugh Williamson

In chapter 14 of
      "Book = Design", Yale University Press, 1983, ISBN 0-300-03035-5,
Hugh Williamson suggests the following:
      If a designer and = illustrator can agree on the dimensions of
      pictures before work = begins, both the typography of the book
      and its illustrations = are the more likely to succeed.
      ...
      When ... full-page = illustrations vary in depth, a standard
      position for the last = line of the caption, perhaps aligned
      with the last line of = text on a full page, ... , even at the
      expense of varying = distances between caption and picture.
      ...
      When a picture and a = long caption are to share the area allocated
      to illustration, the = dimensions of the picture may depend on
      those of the caption, = ... way to determine illustration size
      will be to have such = captions set ... first.
      ...
      A conspicuously = rectangular illustration, ... , is usually
      placed with one or = more of its edges in exact alignment
      with other elements of = the opening.
      ...
      act of reading = favoured by placing the illustration between
      two paragraphs ... to = divide a word immediately before and
      after an illustration = is clumsy.
      ...
      Captions often look = neatest when they are no wider than
      the illustration under = which they are to appear.

John Miles

In "Design for Desktop Publishing" (Gordon = Fraser, 1987, ISBN 0-86092-097-6),
John Miles gives some examples of grid-based designs, = e.g., an A3 design
that has 5 columns each of 12pc with a 1pc gutter = between each column
(page 38).  Presumably, such a design will work = best if artwork is
supplied 12pc, 25pc, 38pc, 51pc or 64pc wide.

IMPLICATIONS

I don't say that the opinions of Hart, McLean, = Williamson, etc. represent
"what LaTeX 3.0 should do".  But their = opinions seem to represent
the sort of thing that LaTeX 3.0 should allow a = designer to implement.  To
this end, it seems to me desirable that LaTeX 3.0 and = the designer should be
working in terms of the same concepts.

>From the above, it appears that the following = concepts may be fundamental:
In old-fashioned terms "the positions of the = edges of the wood/metal block
      holding line-art or = half-tone" or, in PostScript terms, "the
      bounding box for the = file of encapsulated PostScript that is being
      \special-ed in at this = point to define some artwork"
The designer may have a preference about the sizes of = illustrations that
      are to be = allowed.  The artwork may have to be scaled/cropped to be
      one of a = designer-approved set of sizes (or widths).
The width of the underline (=3D caption + legend =3D = 2.09 \caption) may
      depend on the width of = the ("wood or metal") block or EPS
      bounding box (e.g. = artwork) [or occasionally vice versa].
The underline (=3D caption + legend =3D 2.09 = \caption) may need to
      move (e.g. to the side = of the artwork) if the artwork is narrow.
      Alternatively = (Williamson), a caption might move to be aligned
      with the bottom of the = last line of text on a full page.
The underline may actually contain: a caption; a = legend; details of source.
      They may need to be = distinguished typographically.

LaTeX may need "to know" the height and = width of the artwork (i.e.,
height/width of wood/metal block, or EPS bounding = box), so that it
can align "the edges of the block" with = other elements of the page.
In particular, the width of the artwork may determine = the width of
the caption.  LaTeX may also need to manipulate = the underline (i.e., 2.09
\caption) to side of page (Hart) or bottom of page = (Williamson).
LaTeX may need to align the {artwork + underline} by = using the edges
of the artwork or by using the top/bottom lines of = the underline;
hence LaTeX needs explicit access to these = positions.  I have the
impression that LaTeX needs to be working in terms = of: "the bounding
box for the artwork"; the width of the = {caption+legend+source}, the
baselines of the top/bottom lines of the = {caption+legend+source}. I have
the impresssion that the height of the \begin{figure} = ... \end{figure}
and the width of an enclosed minipage are unlikely to = be good enough.

Therefore, it looks to me as though it would be better = for the user (guided
by the designer's preferences) to declare the = height/width of the artwork
(rather than the height/width of the artwork+caption) = and let LaTeX work out
the height/width of the "artwork + caption" = (which could conceivably involve
trying having the caption at the side of narrow = artwork).  Then LaTeX
will "know" the width of the artwork and = can, if appropriate, typeset
the caption to the same width (whereas if width was = specified by
a minipage containing the whole lot, it might be = wider than the
actual artwork, and the caption might end up too = wide).
So I wonder whether some user interface such as the = following might
be appropriate:
\begin{floatfig}     %  A = golden opportunity to phase "figure" out.
          &nbs= p;          %  My = users often don't understand that it "floats"
          &nbs= p;          %  until = they see it happen, then say they don't like
          &nbs= p;          %  = it!  A more meaningful name would help understanding.
\artwork{144pt}{216pt}       = %  Here I assume that the dvi... command
\special{dvi... 144 ... 216 } %  can scale, and = that we want to
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  take advantage of this = feature in this
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  case to scale the artwork = to fit within
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  a 2in x 3in bounding box, = perhaps because
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  the designer has expressed = a preference
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  for artwork that is 2in = wide.  (If not,
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  the user would simply = specify
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  Xpt and Ypt in the = \artwork command
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  where X and Y are taken = from the
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  BoundingBox comment in the = EPS file.)
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  A \begin{picture}(X,Y) = could be used
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  instead of \artwork ... = \special ...
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  if the picture environment = is being used
          &nbs= p;            = ;       %  for a drawing.
\figcaption{...}     %  = LaTeX now knows the width of the artwork,
          &nbs= p;          %  so can, = in principle, try moving the caption
          &nbs= p;          %  to the = side of narrow artwork or typeset the
          &nbs= p;          %  caption = to the same width as the artwork.
\end{floatfig}

INCREASING THE PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS

The discussion on the 14th postulated a situation in = which it might
be necessary to place arbitrary collections of = figures of arbitrary
size.

Obviously "it would be nice" from an = algorithmic point-of-view
to have an algorithm than could handle such a = situation.  But:
*  In practice, a lot of placement problems may = be easier than the
   general problem.  Artwork may = actually be a graph off a graph-plotter
   (produced using the plotting package's = default plot-size and scaled
   using a constant factor):  all = plots will tend to be the same size.
   Photographs will tend to be supplied in = standard sizes.
   [On the other hand, chemical artwork may = tend to produce
   diagrams of differing sizes, because = chemists may want the
   bond-length constant throughout the = document, rather than
   the "structure-diagram size" = constant.]
*  The designer may express a preference for = particular sizes (or at
   least particular widths) for line-art, = half-tones, etc.
   A designer might even say that = "arbitrary collections of figures
   of arbitrary size" threaten the = unity of the book (McLean).
*  dvi-printing commands often allow for the = scaling of a \special-ed
   piece of artwork to a particular = size.
So a lesser objective than "arbitrary = collections of arbitrary sizes"
might deal with the most common cases (and might = conceivably lead to
better design).

There would have to be a convention whereby the = designer could
pass on his/her preferences about the sizes in which = artwork should
be supplied.  I suppose that comments in the = style-file would do.
For example, for Miles's A3 design, a comment in a = style-file might say
      In this design, = LaTeX's algorithm for figure-placement works best
      with figures that have = the following widths: 12pc, 25pc, 38pc,
      51pc, 64pc.
In a design for a single-column book, the comment in = the style-file
might recommend "magic numbers" chosen as = "full-width", "a bit less than
half full-width" etc.  Generally, the user = could be told
      If you have a choice, = we advise you to use one of the following
      widths for best = results with this design ...
Then:
*  users will know how to use dvi-printing = commands' abilities to
   re-scale artwork.  (Otherwise, = they'd probably just use whatever
   size picture happens to come off their = graph-plotter, out of their
   camera, etc.)
*  LaTeX is likely to get given artwork of = "a recommended width" that
   it can make a good job of placing, since = much of the testing of
   the placement algorithm and style-files = would be with artwork of
   "recommended widths".

          &nbs= p;            = ;            =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;    David Rhead


------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3DBD618C--