From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Cc: theoh@chiark.greenend.org.uk Subject: Re: [9fans] psutils et al In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:43:50." <20010215133901.E353B19A0F@mail.cse.psu.edu> References: <20010215133901.E353B19A0F@mail.cse.psu.edu> From: Theo Honohan Message-Id: Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:00:15 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 66231fd0-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 rog@vitanuova.com wrote: > > I'm not sure whether managing the display orientation should be part > > of "page"'s job. Judging from the presence of the "u" option, and by > > analogy with the way I seem to use real photos and sheets of paper, > > I'm inclined to think that it is. > > well, it's certainly to do with the presentation end of the process > (given the postscript "%%Orientation: (Portrait|Landscape)" header) > however, i'm somewhat surprised there's not some way of specifying a > page transformation to ghostscript which would avoid the painful > process of doing it via bit manipulation of the displayed image... It is perhaps surprising that there isn't a general mechanism. On the other hand, it is a driver-specific issue, which is addressed adequately for the X11 case, at least. As long as the driver used by page produces images rather than drawing directly in a window, the question of whether it's page or the driver that does the bit manipulation is moot. (And, if we agree that page should provide the facility of rotating any displayed image, then page might as well do it.) > > from a brief glance at the documentation, a ghostscript driver can > specify an arbitrary transformation between user coords and device > coords, so i imagine it should be possible to tell the plan 9 driver to > rotate the page if the page orientation said so. Yes, at the very least.