Re: image size limit?

["Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>]

    I think it makes sense for some purposes to allow max image size to be
    specified in absolute pixels.  Here is a patch to do that:

That is ok.  But instead of this text

    ! If its value is an integer, it specifies the absolute maximum width
    ! and height, in pixels, for images.  If its value is a floating point
    ! number, that number is multiplied by the width and height of the
    ! selected frame, in pixels, to give the maximum image width and height.
    ! Otherwise, no limit is placed on images.

it would be clearer to write this:

    ! If the value is an integer, it directly specifies the maximum
    ! image height and width, measured in pixels.  If it is a floating
    ! point number, it specifies the maximum image height and width
    ! as a ratio to the frame height and width.  If the value is
    ! non-numeric, there is no explicit limit on the size of images.