On 21.05.08, André Wobst wrote:
> Am 20.05.2008 um 16:53 schrieb Joerg Lehmann:
> > Maybe a single page should alread have a paper
> > format, as opposed to a mere canvas. If one would adopt that view,
> > paperformat should not have a default at all or a sensible one (i.e.,
> > not None).
> I see your point, but I disagree. It's a (very useful) feature to have
> no paper format, i.e. use the bbox of the canvas.
> > I have a slight tendency towards this point, i.e., that there should
> > be always a paperformat for a page. And then, it would probably also
> > make sense to specify A4 as default, like we already specify some more
> > or less arbitrary margin (for the fittosize functionality)...
> > Hmm...
> Note that PyX is not a page layout program. Its primary use is for
> figures. Ok, those are single page objects. (Or maybe call them single
> not-even-like-page objects.)
On the main use case of PyX, I do fully agree, but when people start to
use document.page instead of canvas.canvas, they have to do this for a
reason, don't you think so?
> >> This distinction is perfectly valid for PostScript
> >> vs. Encapsulated PostScript, but document.page is not source of this
> >> distinction. Both PostScript variants do have a page instance (or
> >> maybe several pages for PostScript) in its document structure. And
> >> for
> >> PDF this distinction is not valid at all as there is no special
> >> figure-
> >> only case.)
> >> As Jörg quickly agreed to my solution and we already applied it to
> >> the
> >> repository, I think we're done with it. Except Jörg wants to jump in
> >> again. However, if Jörg still agrees and thus Jörg and I do favour a
> >> particular solution (which is not always the case BTW), you guys out
> >> there basically have to live with it. :-)
> > Hey, I can always be convinced of a better solution. And in the
> > specific
> > case, I was also initially a bit mislead and thought that we were
> > arguing about the canvas and not the page.
> I do understand your point. Maybe we should have a document._page or
> something like this (we should have a proper name for that) and a
> _document ... which are for single page documents without paperformat
> only. On the other hand it is quite useful to have a paperformat
> option in canvas.writeXXXfile(). We certainly should keep this feature.
That would be a possibility.
But I also have to say, that it smells a bit like overengineering.
More pragmatically, I would say, we just leave it like that, keeping
in mind that there would be alternative, maybe more consistent, but
also more complicated options.