Bjoern Pedersen <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Chris Rowley wrote:
> > > Here's a fix for xo-new.dtx, but I am still not sure wether the fixing
> > > is done in the right place at all.
> > Well one good test is: does it look tight now?
> Yes, it looks right. But what is making me think is, that the original
> calculations seem right. It appears, that the floatbox-origin is shifted
> somewhere. So maybe it is really something in the float-setup or
> float-boxing that is wrong, and my fix is just a work-around.
> Especially, as the offset seems to depend on the spancnt of the float,
> something that is not used in this part of xo-new.
> I still have some trouble tracing the float-placement, so I have not found
> anything there, that looks wrong. So that's what I meant with "the right
It's not easy to find out just what packages are supposed to be
provided for what, and which are superseded (like stuff in xo-new
supposedly replacing xo-final). Hard to say what to fix where if one
does not even know what is supposed to be loaded!
Any chance for improving pointers on that? Just so that others might
be able to know just what is worth working on and what is really dead
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum