Re: symbol/color/line consistency in terminals

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> 
>> - "latex" doesn't support color, but we could upgrade that to use color
>>   package.  (Just LaTeX is still very useful for basic figures.)
> 
> 
> That would gravely endanger any usefulness of this driver.  The only 
> real virtue of "latex" compared to other Tex-family drivers (emtex, 
> eepic, and PostScript+LaTeX ones) is that its output is pure, 
> unextended, driver-independent LaTeX.  Pulling in terminal-specific 
> packages like "colour" would break that.

Not sure I follow.  The LaTeX driver already uses the symbol package(s).  What I am thinking is having an option "set term latex color", that will allow placing the appropriate LaTeX color package \color[rgb]{#,#,#} commands.  Without that option the figure will be monochrome but also have no color commands.  Similarly, there is now rotated text, for which we can use the LaTeX rotate package.  This one I don't think needs a special "set term latex rotate".  That would be confusing and there is no need for a "rotate" command if the user doesn't specify some piece of rotated text.

> 
>> - "jpeg", "png", "gif" and "tkcanvas" have no line patterns.
> 
> 
> That's because GD, last I looked, didn't support linewidths on patterned 
> lines.  Which made it rather pointless to try and implement dashing for 
> the first three.
> 
> I have no idea what tk can, or can not do.

No desire to add features to tk, just make things a bit more consistent.

Dan