Message-ID:  <E0zifKv-0007Ni-00@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Wed, 25 Nov 1998 08:34:11 EST." 
              <4.1.19981125083114.024e3020@tiac.net>
Date:         Wed, 25 Nov 1998 13:50:28 +0000
From: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Re: figures and images (was "base" LaTeX)
Status: R

> At 23:15 1998-11-23 +0000, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>
> > > - Guidelines for including graphics (psfrag???)
>
> >aaargh! and you expect me to translate your psfrag stuff to XML???
>
> Indeed.  You may need to get away from all such specialized hacks from
> the TeX world (and there are many when it comes to graphics) and
> focus on standard formats like EPS (for `vector graphics')

psfrag is an eps-patcher (allows you to match fonts between the figure
and the surrounding body text).

> and TIFF (for images).

tiff isn't the only image standard, now that iso has put its stamp of
approval on png...  (there's also ipi/iif, but that's rather ott for
simple image inclusion.  and i don't know of any implementations...)

> In the TeX world we have a habit of digging ourselves into
> holes from which it is hard to extricate ourselves.  Not sure why, but
> the `not invented here' syndrome may play a role in it.

i don't think that's really reasonable.  some formats were designed
for use with tex in the early years, but i find their use increasingly
rare, now that more widely-available techniques have largely been
integrated into tex.

robin