[tex-k] header special extension proposal
vojta at Math.Berkeley.EDU
Tue Aug 16 09:03:20 CEST 2005
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 08:11:52AM +0200, Hendri Adriaens wrote:
> > I don't understand. Why can't you just put your "pre code" and
> > "post code"
> > into the header file?
> The main application of this extension, as said in the background, is to
> include graphics into the ps setup section with some code around it to nest
> the graphic in an object. This means that we don't want to ask the user to
> modify the graphic to include this extra code. That's far too cumbersome for
> the user and too risky (non-unique variable names etc).
The above paragraph doesn't answer my question. Does the user provide
the ps figure?
> If we want to automate this with the current dvips, we arrive at either of
> the 3 `solutions' which all have severe drawbacks/impossibilities. A simple
> extension of the header special could bring the solution here.
> I have build `solutions' 2 and 3 to test them and then found the problems
> mentioned earlier. I even prepared a package, ready for CTAN, which has
> `solution' 2, when I found out about the line breaking problem. I could send
> you a version of that as proof of concept, but it's not supposed to be
> as it doesn't work for all graphics (line breaks!).
As I said in my previous e-mail, please send an example.
More information about the tex-k