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