X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ire.pw.edu.pl;
	h=From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; s=mail; bh=TZJ1T/RScOkT9JkFW0lowMpta/A=;
	b=C8KI0nJKiyg6Y/rpHY7EPFKg4mCNO+4O7iLlcxmNer/Qjh5Giyc5r9kr0yNizUUm1RCFYNJ0hPwhWJvpdldiW92kTQild1hwJ9Imfj5bXsz0iCykAgTvD/TrzDs8bhmE1fodhRg09eG+b4d0XUBNiTgQyA39JvFA/SCEzR1qv4/qEEiqkGBktSs6AUzAnIMwOzCBr+xd2BXxg/YSb6XCPeW3HhCoQB68rNQdypzN0IhSJRrKSErPK2r7KDoj654MegdTpTR9WRfkdbPV4wmgKkN9wNzeaURlY8076cSozRASCO+qWklvjCTTp8qxfrU3TGrETnmaXSR8aFQvJot2Cw==
Message-ID:	<sig.0416d53e6d.20120311001839.d0ew5di484o4kg0c@www.ire.pw.edu.pl>
Date:	Sun, 11 Mar 2012 00:18:39 +0100
From:	wk AT ire DOT pw DOT edu DOT pl
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Text formatting
References:	<1331337138 DOT 10630 DOT 1 AT kwak>
	<1331339779 DOT 2533 DOT 43 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
	<20120309165553 DOT 727c8400 AT svelte>
	<1331342109 DOT 2533 DOT 48 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
	<20120309225208 DOT 3c1a07a7 AT svelte>
In-Reply-To:	<20120309225208.3c1a07a7@svelte>
MIME-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.2)
X-Assp-Version:	2.1.1(11364) on ASSP.nospam
X-Assp-ID:	ASSP.nospam
X-Assp-Original-Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Text formatting
X-IRE-MailScanner-Information:	Please contact the ISP for more information
X-IRE-MailScanner-ID:	q2ANIdRP011292
X-IRE-MailScanner:	Found to be clean
X-IRE-MailScanner-From:	wk AT ire DOT pw DOT edu DOT pl
X-Spam-Status:	No
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id q2ANfOxN024936
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Cytowanie Colin D Bennett <colin AT gibibit DOT com>:

>
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:15:09 +0100
> Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 16:55 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote:
>> > Anyway, why can't a schematic editor produce clean and beautiful
>> > output??
>> >
>>
>> Because it may need 5 seconds for startup in that case ;-)
>>
>> Seriously, can we expect an FOSS schematics editor produce as nice
>> graphics as inkscape and as nice text as LaTeX at the same time,
>> and being easy to use also.
>
> What is there in Wojciech's schematic [1] that would require the
> likes of Inkscape?  It has some very nicely designed and cleanly
> rendered symbols with pleasing line thicknesses, etc., but there is
> no need for gradient fills, XML parsing, blur effects, and so many
> other features that are part of Inkscape.
>
> [1] http://www.ire.pw.edu.pl/~wkazubski/Wzmacniacz-RC
>
> Yes, TeX does produce beautiful text.  Yes, it is big.  But surely
> we can produce nice-looking subscripts and superscripts without
> TeX.  I'm not opposed to an optional feature that makes use of TeX,
> however.
>
> What is really required for “publication-quality” schematics
> besides some slightly improve symbols (I think some of Kai-Martin's
> symbols on gedasymbols.org are particularly elegant, for instance).
>
> Regards,
> Colin
>
I use my own set of symbols, both for publishing and for circuit
design. They are smaller and intended for 1:1 scaling. For example pin
numbers and labels are smaller so pins can  be 100 unit (0.1 in)
spaced. Pictures for publishing are sometimes a bit enlarged, especilly
if used for overhead projector.
Pictures are exported to EPS and imported into OpenOfice/LibreOffice document.

Wojciech Kazubski

- Raw text -