Article View: comp.lang.postscript
Article #1518Re: ruler.ps - an inch/point ruler of your very own
From: C.E. Thompson
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1990 00:53
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1990 00:53
19 lines
1477 bytes
1477 bytes
In article <17663@rpp386.cactus.org> woody@rpp386.cactus.org (Woodrow Baker) writes: > >in reference to my prior posting on this topic, it should be remembered >that a multiply by 72 is a cheap operation ((n<<3)+(n<<6)) which is likely >the reason that 72 was picked for points. ... This has to be rubbish. The numbers the interpreter has to multiply by a lot are the contents of the default transformation matrix; e.g. 4.16667 for a 300 dpi printer. I very much doubt if the choice was made on the basis of such any such bit-grubbing; more likely it was `keep it simple for the users'. Anyone from Adobe care to say? One shouldn't forget, in this context (1) the inter- and intra-printer reproducability of the bit density (2) paper shrinkage. Such differences are liable to wipe out the difference between 72 ppi and 72.27 ppi. Chris Thompson JANET: cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx Internet: cet1%phx.cam.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1728@gannet.cl.cam.ac.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!cet1References:
<21772@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1990Jan14.180821.18711@trigraph.uucp> <17663@rpp386.cactus.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!cet1 From: cet1@cl.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: ruler.ps - an inch/point ruler of your very own Message-ID: <1728@gannet.cl.cam.ac.uk> Date: 16 Jan 90 00:53:16 GMT References: <21772@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1990Jan14.180821.18711@trigraph.uucp> <17663@rpp386.cactus.org> Sender: news@cl.cam.ac.uk Reply-To: cet1@cl.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson) Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK Lines: 19