Hello everyone. If I have a very long, thin JPEG, is it better to rescale it by specifiying the height, or by scaling it down?
Here's the error I get:
<zhm_public_notice2.jpg, id=1, 162.6075pt x 1165.35374pt>
File: zhm_public_notice2.jpg Graphic file (type jpg)
<use zhm_public_notice2.jpg>
Package pdftex.def Info: zhm_public_notice2.jpg used on input line 4.
(pdftex.def) Requested size: 162.6071pt x 1165.3509pt.
[1
{/var/lib/texmf/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map}]
Overfull \vbox (615.3509pt too high) has occurred while \output is active []
@JosephWright I was worried it was going to conclude with: "I'm not going to do that any more", so I skipped to the end. Fortunately he doesn't say that.
I'm surprised he can't figure out what early releases of tetex were in Debian. I thought Debian kept all the archives.
@FaheemMitha You just want to have a pdf, instead of a jpg, right? standalone just uses the content and outputs that as the final pdf. You can add a border though. Nothing to care about with respect to page margins, numbering etc.
@FaheemMitha No. Currently that happens because the image is too big for a page of your page format including margins, so LaTeX decides to try on the next page, and gives up before adding another blank page. Standalone doesn't have a physical page.
@Johannes_B Without scaling, no. With scaling, yes. But LaTeX still inserts a blank page first, even when it fits on the second page. I guess it thinks its overfull.
@FaheemMitha Can't check without the actual stuff. The Q on main says, that the imagebox is 100pt to big with respect to the vertical dimension of the page, i.e. it would overprint the page number.
@FaheemMitha But not the margin. It sticks into the margin, hence it doesn't fit into a page, hence the extra blank page. Everything you don't have to think about when dealing with standalone.
Looking at the license discussion on the main meta, it's surprising that other people haven't notices before that CC-BY-SA isn't the best way to deal with software. Thanks to @LoopSpace we've had a meta question for years dealing with exactly this
Part of the discussion about packaging some of the TikZ answers into a LaTeX package has centred on the issue of licensing the code. Contributions here are licensed under a CC license (see links at the bottom of the page) which isn't the best for software: even the people behind the CC licenses ...
@egreg you could have phoned me and I would have explained to you what to do:-)
@Johannes_B yes if it's just that but I assume it's just the MWE, if the whole doc is multicol and you just want to fit in a captioned table, the answers are OK
@JosephWright has anyone referenced that from the main meta discussion?
What surprises me with some of the feedback here is that it's not like no-one has noticed that the CC-BY-SA conditions for contributions might need to be supplemented by a license for code. For example, on TeX-se we've got a meta thread starting in 2011 pointing this out and allowing individuals to specify a (dual) license for reuse purposes. — Joseph Wright3 hours ago
Some questions: 1. do you know how I can set the pagesize with xelatex? Why is it so hard. :| 2. Do you know any good fonts to use with maths and text?
@Alenanno there are less choices with math, for opentype math fonts you basically have latin modern, xits, cambria math, asana math or the tex gyre fonts, pick one of those then pick a text font to match
@PauloCereda Friend got one for Christmas: his brother came home and said 'what is there to do?', and when there wasn't anything said 'right, you are getting an Xbox for Christmas'. That said, the brother in question works for a company based in the pacific north-west ;-)
@JosephWright: At least in Brazil, I very satisfied with XONE: their marketplace works, they have some nice title (although it enrages me the fact of not covering all games in the catalogue due to country restrictions), the system looks OK (altough it's Windows-based), the controller is good and Gold subscription gives you 2 free games every month (two for each system, XONE and X360).
@Alenanno no that just means you are using xetex, the lines I posted means that the geometry package detected you are using xetex 9which for example it won't do if you use \usepackage[pdftex]{geometry} as it will believe what you tell it. as ever a MWE would help
@DavidCarlisle None like you said. But I guess I found an alternative solution. I have an alternative question. In order to use New TX fonts, do I just need to add the package "\usepackage{newtxtext,newtxmath}"?
@Alenanno My pleasure. :) Just note that you might post-process your resuting image to reduce the size. I had to do that in all my ads (I opened them in Gimp and reduced the colour mode to interlaced).
I am currently trying to show the domain of variables in a simple equation:
\[\begin{matrix}
x & \cdot & W_{1,2} & = & o\\
\in & & \in & & \in\\
\mdr^{1\times n} & & \mdr^{n \times m} & & \mdr^{1 \times m}
\end{matrix}\]
There are some more issues with this way to show the domain...
@JosephWright well it does mean that you have to remember the entire manual before you know how to type the command, it's a lot easier to read expl3 syntax than write it (without editor completion support).
@JosephWright -- i'm pretty sure tugboat doesn't have doi's set up, but am checking. it was looked into a rather long time ago, and appeared to be somewhat expensive; don't know what's involved these days, and the situation may be different. (what's the reason for the question?)
@barbarabeeton I'm thinking about stability of links, particularly for assets which are not necessarily web pages. DOIs are pretty much ubiquitous nowadays for journal articles and increasingly for academic books/book chapters.
@JosephWright -- that's true (about stability, i mean). ams now has doi's for everything, but ams has a much bigger budget than tug does. nonetheless, it's probably time to think about it again. (if baskerville ever resuscitates, will it have doi's?)
@JosephWright -- for what parts of the latex project website would doi's be appropriate? (admittedly, the part i'm most familiar with is the latex-bugs archive.)
@barbarabeeton We've got some website work ongoing and there's a question of URI stability for the various files we've got. That feels to me to be the wrong approach: DOIs feel like the 'right' way to give a reference to an article, presentation slides, Etc.
@barbarabeeton Just wondered if you'd got any experience
@DavidCarlisle You can't restrict stability to URIs, I'm afraid, as for example an academic article (currently) can be in HTML or PDF format, and they need an abstract page, and that all needs one identifier
@DavidCarlisle I'll forward: I plan to reply but very much as an amateur
@DavidCarlisle Web pages are one thing, files, data sets, ... are different
@DavidCarlisle Well academic citations traditionally don't use URIs (normally journal/year/page as a minimum for journals, author/title/publisher/year for books), so a move to adding a DOI doesn't feature at all.
@DavidCarlisle I'm also sceptical about the idea that the links in question are actually required to be stable (in the sense 'is anyone going to have cited this in that form')
@PauloCereda Yes, finally, after the months of November and December have been much too warm (up to 17 degrees!). It's white everywhere. And it's snowing
@JosephWright you can of course do that with a URL (and people who think that should be the way of the world convert doi back to url form ) (not necessarily saying that you should, but that is the URL/REST orthodox view)
@JosephWright Ok, thanks. I am not asking for myself (I have a 'regular' membership meanwhile) I just want to lure some users here to nominate themselves (in case there will a competition only, of course)
@DavidCarlisle Whilst the realistic recognise that DOIs are designed to be stable irrespective of (necessary) changes behind the scenes (say a journal gets sold from one publisher to another ...)
@JosephWright yes but in practice same is or can be true of url it's not as if a url starting www.foobar.com is any indication that the server is owned or maintained by a company called foobar
@DavidCarlisle Like I say, I guess my main concern is that giving 'stable' URIs for end-files is wrong in the first place: it's the 'concept' you should be linking as the end format can change
@JosephWright not really, each individual resource can have individual uri and there can also be a uri going to the concept that resolves to different entities depending what you ask for so if you make an http request for a pdf file that's what you get, if you ask for an audio rendering you get that...
@JosephWright yes they have the same reference x.y.z but a http request isn't just that it has metadata in the accept headers so if you connect to that the idea is that that refers to the abstract entity and whether you get html2 or html5 or pdf or a series of gifs is determined elsewhere
@JosephWright yes so in tim bl's original model you would give a URL to the dataset not to its particular representations.
@JosephWright lots of people have thought that (including me when I'm not arguing for the other side as no one else is) which is why URL discussions at w3c are even longer than licence ones. How they are used in practice and how they were originally conceived (and specced) don't really match.
@DavidCarlisle Except if you try that people would be using the URL that had, which will be form-dependent, whereas DOIs are deliberately abstract and also independent of the continued existing of the original server (so the idea of the data can survive the loss of the source)
@DavidCarlisle :-)
@DavidCarlisle I guess I'm looking at this with my 'day job' hat on: DOIs work
@JosephWright but TBL will go to great lengths to explain that you can give a URL to anything eg a person or an idea they are designed to be abstract. Trouble is it is much easier to use them as a direct mapping to a filesystem on a particular remote macine
@JosephWright you should work more on the semantic web (or pure mathematics) whether things work is a minor implementation detail.
@DavidCarlisle Certainly. The think is though you still need some URL, and having foobar.com/journals/some-journal/some-ref-for-an-article isn't 'easy' compared to 'DOI: 10.1234/ja567890`
@DavidCarlisle :-)
@DavidCarlisle I know!
@DavidCarlisle I'll see what I can come up with for the news
@DavidCarlisle Well I have an DOI resolver add-on installed, for example, so can highlight 10.1021/ja506693m and go straight there. The idea is that you can always use the one website to resolve DOIs (dx.doi.org)
@DavidCarlisle In any case, even if we were talking URLs the same point would apply: I don't think saying you have stability to a file is the right approach, it should be to some landing-point for a file
@PauloCereda Awww, that is funny ... I actually found that one on a site with 60 cute baby duck pictures to make you say awww ... and you did say awww :D ( animals.ekstrax.com/… )
@JosephWright looks Ok (especially the second one:-) I agree really despite arguing at length above about URL stability, that there are rather few links to the current site that we need to keep and if that's the only reason for "self" hosting then we may as well just use github (which reminds me of something I'd forgotten all about, my experiments with hosting ukfaq via gh-pages)
@UlrikeFischer I was not asking with the intent of polemicizing, by the way. Also, my comments were just based on the current info, I did ask the OP to provide a .tex example to show the problem in my first comment.
What do you guys think? I doubt \titleformat and \titlespacing were supposed to be in the document:
I use TeXnicCenter with MikTeX. I updated it, but the only changing thing is that I don't get the error anymore, but the geometry is still the same. I think \titleformat{\chapter}{\normalfont\bfseries\Large}{\thechapter.\quad}{0pt}{} \titlespacing{\chapter}{0pt}{-50pt}{40pt} needs to be after the preamble.I did so and now it runs. But I still got another arror (which I didn't tell so far). Can I upload a *.jpg file here? — Nepumuk2 mins ago