xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric SCHAEFFER <ESCHAEF...@Techmetrix.net>
Subject RE: Scaling of images
Date Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:36:03 GMT
I'm not sure to understand.

Can't we know the dpi of the document ?
Also another thing: if only one size is writen in the FO file (width or
height), we should keep the aspect ratio, no ?

Eric.


Eric SCHAEFFER
Consultant TechMetrix Research
http://www.techmetrix.net
Groupe SQLi
http://www.sqli.com
Créateurs de sites intelligents depuis 1995
 

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De: Fotis Jannidis [mailto:fotis.jannidis@lrz.uni-muenchen.de]
> Date: mercredi 13 décembre 2000 17:40
> À: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
> Objet: RE: Scaling of images
> 
> 
> A while ago we discussed scaling of images on the list. Our problem 
> was: what is the conversion between pixels and document units? 
> 
> Now Anders Berglund from the xsl:fo working group clarified this: 
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> I thought the XSL CR (and the text has not
> changed for several WDs) text was clear that IF a graphics 
> format (like
> JPEG and TIF) has an intrinsic size that it was used for the 
> graphic (as
> modified by the various scaling properties) and that IF a 
> graphics format
> (like GIF) did not have an intrinsic size defined the 
> conversion to "real"
> units was implementation defined BUT (in a Note) it is 
> suggested that for
> raster formats 1/96" for 1 pixel is a reasonable conversion.
> <<<<<<<<<<
> 
> This means, we don't have to invent a factor (what I mistakingly 
> thought), but there is a recommendation in the recommendation. 
> Handling of image size would look like this: Check whether the 
> image is in a file format which has intrinsic size 
> definition. If yes, 
> use this, if no, take the pixel size (* 1/96")
> 
> Fotis
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message