Subject: Re: rotating pages? From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 15:21:27 +0100 (BST) |
> The way to think about it is that a simple-page-sequence produces a sequence > of page areas. ok > But there has to be a simple-page-sequence enclosing all that, which means > you've got a nested simple-page-sequence. Since a simple-page-sequence true in that case, but i do see a simple sequence, followed by a page sequence. > takes its content areas and composes them to make a sequence of page areas, > a nested simple-page-sequence doesn't make a whole lot of sense (unless the > nested simple-page-sequence has a smaller page size...). indeed. i wonder what a page sequence of A4 pages, filled with nested page sequences containing a5 pages, might mean... > As far the the standard goes what you get is a page area whose width is > 297mm and whose height is 211mm. How you image the areas on paper is up to you. ok. makes sense > The RTF backend specifies the landscape orientation whenever the width is > greater than the height; it does this mainly because that was the way that > seemed to keep Word behaving reasonably. i am tempted to make the TeX backend macros do the same thing sebastian DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: rotating pages?, James Clark | Thread | Re: rotating pages?, Frank Christoph |
Re: rotating pages?, Frank Christoph | Date | Re: rotating pages?, James Clark |
Month |