X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Text formatting
From:	Stefan Salewski <mail AT ssalewski DOT de>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<1331425404.3009.14.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box>
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>
	<sig DOT 0416d53e6d DOT 20120311001839 DOT d0ew5di484o4kg0c AT www DOT ire DOT pw DOT edu DOT pl>
	<1331425404 DOT 3009 DOT 14 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
Date:	Sun, 11 Mar 2012 11:35:26 +0100
Message-ID:	<1331462126.2529.9.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Evolution 2.32.3
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 01:23 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:

> > 
> 
> You symbols are fine, but the sentence
> 
> "intended for 1:1 scaling. For example pin numbers and labels are
> smaller so pins can  be 100 unit (0.1 in) spaced."
> 
> makes not much sense to me.

OK, after some more thinking...
For EPS output, the 100 units <==> 0.1 in
may be true -- if the generated EPS is included unscaled in a document.
But this is a rare use case, and of course this EPS generation involves
a scaling itself.

My point was that there is not really an absolute size included in
gschem symbols.

The exception may be the point size of fonts -- this is the best
candidate for an absolute size in symbols or schematics, ie if we
consider the the 1pt == 1/72 in relation of postscript.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_%28typography%29

- Raw text -