Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 7 Mar 2000 19:49:00 +0000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Chris Rowley writes:
> I forgive Sebastian Rahtz!! (Well for one thing, anyway
> ... there's still hyperref:-) )
you obviously haven't looked at passivetex yet
> for never having supplied us humble coders with what he claims is `the
> obvious algorithm for float positioning (including spanning floats)'.
its from the same family as the Carlisle algorithm for word
counting. it goes
WHILE it_doesnt_look_nice()
continue
END
implementation of "it_doesnt_look_nice" is in local libraries
> Not necessarily help in designing this wonderful algorithm but in
> formulating, or finding in the literature, the rules and heuristics for
> judging whether a float placement is acceptable and/or good.
one data point you have to consider is "what the picture looks
like". it makes a difference whether it is a line diagram or a
photograph, for instance, and how dark it looks.
I suspect this "floating silver bullet" doesn't exist. Shock, Horror!
Was Knuth wrong in his entire initial premise that computers could
solve typography? You have to wonder about a man who rates Georges
Perec over Patrick O'Brian.
Sebastian
|
|
|