> The real question is not What but Why. IMO, it's because 96 dpi > (monitor screen resolution) can never approximate the resolution > of the printed page (300, 600, 2540, whatever).
I wasn't referring to the appearance on a monitor but on paper. And, the xdvi output does come close to showing how the printed page will appear. Using the little magifier allows even better evaluation.
Perhaps I expressed myself badly. My point was that while ever applications are forced to compromise their algorithms to accommodate monitor resolutions they will never typeset as well as applications that do not have to compromise.
I learned this when I was using FrameMaker at 1600% resolution while trying to position some type precisely. I finally got to the point where a thousandth of a point (1/72000 of an inch) change on paper resulted in a "huge" shift on screen -- the PostScript algorithms could handle the minute changes, the printer was having real problems, but the Monitor was so far out that it was no longer reliable.
Mind you, you have to be pretty weird to want to move something 1/1000 of a point but that's immaterial.
Your reference to xdvi is spot on -- but the LyX output has to be reprocessed each time, a matter of little consequence in reality. But an anathema to the wordprocessor crowd.
I repeat my argument that it is the difference in monitor resolution that forces the wordprocessors to use inferior typesetting -- if they used better typesetting then their screen would no longer reflect what was being printed. I appreciate that it's the cart driving the horse but I believe that is what's happening.
Robert Thorsby
