Re: Cleanup list of patches and bug reports on sf.net

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

Harald Harders wrote:

>On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Ethan Merritt wrote:
>
>  
>
>>On Monday 25 October 2004 06:50 am, Petr Mikulik wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>>>>This patch fixes bug #1000676  (Rotated multiline text misaligned).
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>I would also prefer an option. Maybe "rleft, rright, rcenter" for rotated-sth?
>>>      
>>>
>>Maybe an additional keyword "block" as a modifier to left/right/center
>>    
>>
>
>I agree partially.
>
>  
>
>>Rotate text but use current baseline for alignment:
>>	set label ... rotate by 45 left
>>    
>>
>
>I don't agree with "current". The alignment baseline should switch to
>horizontal earlier than from 89 to 90 degree. Maybe above 45 degree. It's
>nonsense to have a vertical alignment when using text that is rotated by,
>for example, 60 degree.
>

Well, not exactly nonsense.  For example, say I want to have my x-axis 
tic titles at an angle, and I want the end of the words to line up right 
below the tic marks.  I think that requires vertical alignment.

Technically, there are two alignments with every block of text, or *any* 
object I guess.  (I'm talking 2D graphs now; I'd have to think what the 
consequences are in 3D.)

Another example of this is the "key" patch where I changed the syntax

               {left | right | top | bottom | outside | below | <position>}

to

               {{inside | outside} | {<position>} | {above | below}}
               {left | right | center} {top | bottom | center}

There should be independent alignment in both directions for text as 
well, I'd argue.  Just precisely how it behaves for rotated text is 
slightly open for interpretation.  I.e., when we speak of 
left,right,center and top,bottom,center are we speaking of the text 
block or the graph?  That sort of thing.

Dan