Gentle persons: I don't disagree with anything that was said in response to my first message. I thought I had made it clear that I have no love for bit-mapped graphics when I suggested png for now with a personal bias to lean toward svg, where appropriate, in future and that I was not suggesting we dump the dxf files (see below).
However, I am trying to be realistic (or should that be pragmatic?). There is a push to get the 2.5 docs into shape in time for the code release, and I just want to see them look acceptable. I'd rather have all the figures in place in both html and pdf versions of the docs, though some show the effect of rasterization, than to have near-perfect figures in the pdf version but missing figures in the html version. We can come back to the subject of figure production after we've fixed the higher priority problems in the v2.5 docs. There are 28 unique dxf files right now (with 3 duplicated in the docs/src directories for a total of 31). I hope soon to have a *tested* proposal for how to rebase these figures in an open-source format for which there are appropriate open-source software tools. Regards, Kent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
