Re: patch -- fix resolution in pango (win32 backend)

[Joaquin Cuenca Abela <e98cuenc yahoo com>]

--- Tor Lillqvist <tml iki fi> wrote:
> Joaquin Cuenca Abela writes:
>  > Because WYSIWYG programs want to use the same
> font/same
>  > typographical size on screen and on the printer.
> 
> Don't all such programs have a "view at X %"
> setting? 
> 
>  > Because you don't want to redo every document,
> every
>  > presentation, every whatever that uses fonts for
> each
>  > screen size that you have.
> 
> I don't understand you here. Fonts for each screen
> size? With

I was lacking a comma:

"every whatever that uses fonts, for each screen size
that you have."

The point here is that if you use real physical
measures to draw fonts, the fonts that looks ok in a
desktop screen, may have 4 points in a very big screen
(as in the example that I wrote about a big 50" screen
for giving conferences).

Your reply to that problem was something as: "let's
going to give a fake size to these big screens, to
make them look like a normal screen, and then keep the
angular size constant."

If you're ready to give a fake dpi for big monitors,
why are you reluctant to give a fake dpi for desktop
monitors?

> scaleable fonts, isn't the rendering of font
> outlines into pixels
> on-demand, in the background?
> 
>  > Because nobody cares (but highly specialized
> software,
>  > as CAD programs) about the real physical size.
> 
> And what says nobody would want to use GTK+ in a CAD
> program?

I'm not trying to hide the physical width and height
size of the screen, that may be useful, as I said for
CAD programs and such.

I'm just saying that, even if this information is
there for a good reason (CAD programs), it's not there
to get the dpi for text (nor for usual programs).

>  > You just want your stuff to render with the same
> number of
>  > pixels independently of your screen/resolution 
> 
> Certainly not. One 21" display might be running at
> 1024x768 (because
> of a crappy graphics card, very long cable, or
> something), another 21"
> display might have 1900x1200. If you use both
> displays at the same
> viewing distance, surely you want icon labels, for
> instance, to look
> about the same size. Not the same number of pixels.

Certainly not.  If you're using a 1900x1200 resolution
you will have buttons, icons, scroll bars, everything
with the same number of pixels, but not with the same
size.  Fonts are not an exception.

If you want to run in such a high resolution, you
should turn on some kind of "Big icons" option, and
some kind of "Large Font" option (option that happens
to exist, and that will bump the dpi used for text to
120 dpi).

Let's face it, people knows that they should take
special care if they want to run at a different
resolution.  They not only have to change the size of
their fonts, but also the size in images and such (or
zoom the app).

But nobody expects to have their fonts growing with
the resolution, while everything else remains with the
same size.

>  > Because you want gtk+ apps render text at the
> same size as any
>  > other windows application.
> 
> But what prevents you from telling the gtk+ app to
> render text at the
> size you prefer? What is so bad if you can specify
> the size in true
> units? (And not "points, with approximately 30 to 40
> percent added".)

I (and I think that mostly everybody) largely prefer a
method that gives me control over the number of pixels
that will be used to draw a text (even if the physical
size depends on the monitor), than a method that gives
me only approximative control over the physical size
of the text (physical size that will anyway be rounded
to the size of a pixel).

I will give another example to prove my point.  Say
that I wrote a gtk+ application that popups a message
box with something as: "Do you want to quit?" (say
that the default font has 12 points).

I test it in my screen, and I see the dialog box pop
up with the text using a (little but still readable)
font.

Now I deploy my program to the users, and these users
with big screens, or these big low resolutions, start
complaining that they can not read the message box,
because letters have something as 4 pixels height.

What should I say to my users?

Change your .gtkrc file???!!!

>  > You can not ask wordprocessors, for instance, to
> render text on
>  > screen at 16points, and then on the printer at
> 10points.
> 
> No. If I want text to print in 10 points, I can ask
> the application it
> to display the document at 140% of its true size,
> for instance.

not everybody has zoom.  Wordpad for instance don't
has it.  And a *ton* of little apps don't have it and
still want to print the same thing that the users sees
in the screen.

> BTW, anybody know where Windows gets the HORZSIZE
> and VERTSIZE from?
> Does it simply use some hardcoded "common" dpi value
> to deduce them
> from the HORZRES and VERTRES? Or is there some way
> for a driver to
> tell Windows the monitor size, if the driver knows
> what model the
> monitor is? Can a plug-and-play monitor tell the
> host its true size?
> Can a digitally connected flat panel display?
> 
> If these values are just guesses, there probably
> should be a feature
> in GDK so the user can provide the size of a screen.
> Either via
> environment variables, command-line switches, or
> maybe some file.

I don't really know.  I agree 100% with you that gdk
should provide a way to configure that if windows can
not do it, but I don't agree with it having something
to do with the rendering of fonts.

Cheers,


=====
Joaquin Cuenca Abela
e98cuenc yahoo com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com