X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Text formatting From: Stefan Salewski To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <1331425404.3009.14.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box> References: <1331337138 DOT 10630 DOT 1 AT kwak> <1331339779 DOT 2533 DOT 43 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box> <20120309165553 DOT 727c8400 AT svelte> <1331342109 DOT 2533 DOT 48 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box> <20120309225208 DOT 3c1a07a7 AT svelte> <1331425404 DOT 3009 DOT 14 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 11:35:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1331462126.2529.9.camel@AMD64X2.fritz.box> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 01:23 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote: > > > > You symbols are fine, but the sentence > > "intended for 1:1 scaling. For example pin numbers and labels are > smaller so pins can be 100 unit (0.1 in) spaced." > > makes not much sense to me. OK, after some more thinking... For EPS output, the 100 units <==> 0.1 in may be true -- if the generated EPS is included unscaled in a document. But this is a rare use case, and of course this EPS generation involves a scaling itself. My point was that there is not really an absolute size included in gschem symbols. The exception may be the point size of fonts -- this is the best candidate for an absolute size in symbols or schematics, ie if we consider the the 1pt == 1/72 in relation of postscript. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_%28typography%29