Re: Lines to edges of \center-column

[caagr98]

On 04/23/17 03:47, David Wright wrote:
> Then I don't know what you mean. When you drag over them, they turn
> blue because you _have_ selected them (drag.png, apologies for the
> size). Then you can paste them into, say, a bash shell command line
> (pasted.png, the box at the right is the inactive cursor).

The top (kana) line can't be selected at all, is what I'm trying to say. 
It acts a bit different in different viewers, but none seem to be able 
to select+copy it.

> But why do you want to select part of a PDF like that when _you_
> generated it? I often do that with _other_ people's PDFs when I
> want to get at their text.

It's not that I want to select it, it's just that I hate when things are 
inconsistent like that.

> The rendition of the dragged area is entirely a function of the
> viewer you're using. Xpdf always shows a rectangle and lifts
> just the text therein, rather than being constrained by the lines
> of text (xpdf.png, more apologies). However, I think it mixes up
> its encodings so the pasted text makes little sense.
>
> That looks a lot like evince that you're using. Very good for reading
> Chase credit card statements and encrypted PDFs, which xpdf can't
> manage, but I hate the interface.

It's actually Atril, MATE's Evince fork. I use it because it respects my 
GTK theme, and unlike Evince, it doesn't use client-side window 
decorations, so it works with i3. I think xpdf's UI looks horrible, btw. 
Its rendering quality seems good, though.

> Anyway, my guess is that evince
> treats keeping the characters _as_ individual characters as its
> priority, whereas xpdf tries to render what will print.

Yeah, I've noticed that Atril often renders things slightly differently 
when zoomed-out.

> One really needs an armoury of PDF viewers.

And yet, PDF's main point is that it looks identical on all devices...

> So now the question becomes what do you want to produce these PDFs
> for, and how are you going to ascertain which browser the consumers
> are using? If I were sending them to my printers, my expectations
> (and theirs) would be the sort of copies that I've shown magnified.

That kind of minutiae doesn't bother me very much (only a little...); 
the big problem is that the lines on the kana row and the kanji row are 
different shapes. They're both three box-drawings on each side, but they 
look quite different in all PDF viewers I've tried (Firefox, Chromium, 
Atril, Okular, xpdf).

Also, I wouldn't say 70kb is much to apologize for.