Hi Ulrich,
> > but sticking with it for a moment: golden ratio between what? (i know
> > it is also only meant as an example, but what are the ingredients?)
>
> place top of float area so that the ratio to the height of the page is
> like the golden ratio
>
> + a ttt ttt
> | ttt ttt
> | ttt
> | b AAAAA ttt
> | AAAAA ttt
> | AAAAA ttt
> | ttt
> | ttt ttt
> | ttt ttt
> + c ttt ttt
>
> bc/ac = golden ratio; e.g. if the height of page has 42\baselineskip
> then b would start after line 16 (if I calculated correctly ;-)
ok so what you propose here is a golden ratio specifying the top point of the
float area (ie a special setting of my second proposed rule).
> > so can you perhaps give some explicit pseudo specification?
> >
> > \DeclareFloatArea
> > { position = m % (or t or b)
> > ,column = 1 % 2 3 4 ...
> > ,span = 1 % 2 3 ...
> > ... % your spec
> > }
>
> \DeclareFloatArea
> { position = m % (or t or b)
> ,column = 1 % 2 3 4 ...
> ,span = 1 % 2 3 ...
> ,vsize = 6\baselineskip % vsize of area
> ,pos = absolute(16\baselineskip) % vertical starting position
> }
>
> > precise enough to make your picture example page come to life :-)
ok, though this needs a couple more parameters to specify how the float is
positioned within the area unless that is always supposed top to bottom (which
gives you a parameter without variation possibilities).
> maybe a global definition which can be overridden is more useful, e.g.,
could be but that is technique ie interface design not a functionality
change/extension
> > =========================================
> >
> > > > But what I'm after is this:
> > > >
> > > > - assuming you have the possibility of specifying one (or more?)
> middle
> > > > areas for floats by which I mean an area to receieve float(s)
> where
> > > > above and below there is still text
>
> this should be covered by my above definition (text above
> 16\baselineskip, float area 6\baselineskip, text after
> 42-(16+6)\baselineskip).
as one possibility for specification (not the actual values but the concept:
which is fixed starting position with a given vertical size and one area
only). my question is what others should/could be supported?
>
> > > <rulers>, <colour specs, including transparency>,
> >
> > aren't those more kind of decorations on the area? so in other words
> > irrelevant for placement (other than the decorative elements might
> need space)
> > or do i miss something.
>
> yes, that's true but where do you define global definitions for the
> visual appearance? And one should always have the possibility to
> override some specs, e.g. in a special case one might not want top
> rules.
sure. all those could and should eventually become part of an area
specification globally with overwrites or individually. what I mean is as far
as float placement is concerned they play no role so for the discussion I'm
currently not concerned about them.
> > can you explain what you mean by "including transparency"?
>
> You should be able to define background colour|pictures, rules (top,
> bottom, box, coloured), transparency for background colour|pictures and
> maybe even a gradient colour. Plus a command to override the global
> definition in a special case.
ok so it is what I thought you meant
>
> > * The ratio of t1 to t2 is fixed by the design and a float AAA can be
> > placed into the middle position if neither t1 nor t2 become too
> > small. (Downside of this kind of layout might be that the positioning
> > of the floats drastically varies from page to page.)
> >
> > * The end position of t1 is fixed (vertically) so that a middle float
> > always starts on the same point on a page. Further restriction then
> > that t2 is not getting smaller as a certain value.
> >
> > * The starting starting position of t2 is fixed so that the bottom of
> > the middle floats always appear on the same vertical position on the
> > page, again with some further restrictions to the size of t1 this
> > time.
>
> I thought this was what I'd proposed.
yes, I think so, you proposed option 2. But what about:
> > * ...other ideas...
is there any kind of reasonable rule set that is not covered by my initial
variations and should perhaps be supported as well?
>
> sorry if my explanations are too cryptic.
not at all, it is a difficult topic after all.
frank
|