Re: [odt] equation labels

[Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>]

Myles English <mylesenglish@gmail.com> writes:

>>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:09:58 +0100, Myles English said:
>
>   >> I have added support for honoring captions, label and attributes
>   >> for images that are dervied from latex fragments. Checkout the git
>   >> repo and let me know if there are any rough edges that need to be
>   >> ironed out.
>
>   > Thank you!  I have just got around to trying this out and it works
>   > great.  The only issue now is that the resolution of the pngs is low
>   > and looks terrible.  I vaguely remember changing it deep in my latex
>   > installation somewhere.
>
> Actually there is an old (2006) thread including a patch about a file
> option to change the resolution:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2006-09/msg00010.html

INCREASING the `:html-scale' scale property in
`org-format-latex-options' will INCREASE the `-D' option by same factor.

I believe the above setting together with a "suitable" value of
#+ATTR_ODT: (:scale xxx) will achieve the required balance.

If you have lots of equations then applying #+ATTR_ODT option to each of
the images is a bit cumbersome. In that case you can tweak
`org-export-odt-pixels-per-inch' (The default value of this variable is
same as `display-pixels-per-inch' variable of Emacs session). HALVING
this variable will DOUBLE the size of all images uniformly.

Note for posterity:
1. ODT expects that the image size be specified in cms or inches. I
   believe image files have no "physical" dimensions associated with
   them but only pixel size. Mapping from pixels to cms or inches is
   again determined by display properties (ie, the same image will
   appear in different physical dimensions on different monitors.)

2. On my Netbook, MS Paint uses a pixels-per-inch of 96.0 while Emacs'
   display-pixels-per-inch reports a value of 72.0

Image sizes are a grey area to me. If there is an expert out there
willing to educate me I am all ears.

Jambunathan K.

> But I don't think it was applied and I am not sure how it would fit in
> the current scheme.  Can anyone advise?
>
> Myles
>
>
>

--