Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[luigi scarso]

In page-lay.tex
\definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]
maybe is wrong.
It should be
\definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=450mm,\c!height=320mm]

See http://www.theearthpaper.net/paper-sizes.html
but need a confirm

-- 
luigi
----------------------------------------------------------------
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry
to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Peter Rolf]

luigi scarso wrote:
> In page-lay.tex
> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]
> maybe is wrong.
> It should be
> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=450mm,\c!height=320mm]
> 
> See http://www.theearthpaper.net/paper-sizes.html
> but need a confirm
> 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_217

says the opposite.

Best, Peter
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[luigi scarso]

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_217
>
> says the opposite.
Yes, but searching for 'SRA3 "450x320" ' give some hits,
and I have two differents blocks of 500 sheets labelled
SRA3 450x320
Why this confusion ?

-- 
luigi
----------------------------------------------------------------
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry
to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Tobias Burnus]

Peter Rolf schrieb:
> luigi scarso wrote:
>   
>> In page-lay.tex
>> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]
>> maybe is wrong.
>> It should be
>> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=450mm,\c!height=320mm]
>>     
I have found both versions on the net, but as RA* and SRA* are only
scaled versions of the A* papers (5% and 15% larger), I think the
definition should match the one of A*.

As A3 is portrait,
   \definepapersize [A3]  [\c!width=297mm,\c!height=420mm]
I would also expect RA and SRA to be portrait as well and not landscape,
ConTeXt has
  \definepapersize [RA3]  [\c!width=305mm,\c!height=430mm]
  \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]

>From that point of view, the definition is correct.

Tobias
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Willi Egger]

Hi,

this is an interesting discussion. I admit, that I do not have the  
ultimate knowledge. Nevertheless I doubt whether the A3 format has to  
be considered portrait.


Consider A4 which is portrait because of the grain direction  
(Laufrichtung) in the height. Otherwise A3 is two A4 and hence the  
grain direction is in the shorthand. - Generally speaking the  
graindirection is in the direction of the longer edge in all A- 
foomats with even numbers, including A0. - Looking in this way at RA3  
and SRA3 I would expect that the graindirection is also on the short  
side. Therefore The definition shoud be width=305 and height=430 mm  
and width=320 and height=450mm respectively.

So Luigi you learned determination of the grain direction in Epen,  
please look this up in your two blocks!

Kind regards Willi, the bookbinder ;-)

On May 3, 2007, at 2:29 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:

> Peter Rolf schrieb:
>> luigi scarso wrote:
>>
>>> In page-lay.tex
>>> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]
>>> maybe is wrong.
>>> It should be
>>> \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=450mm,\c!height=320mm]
>>>
> I have found both versions on the net, but as RA* and SRA* are only
> scaled versions of the A* papers (5% and 15% larger), I think the
> definition should match the one of A*.
>
> As A3 is portrait,
>    \definepapersize [A3]  [\c!width=297mm,\c!height=420mm]
> I would also expect RA and SRA to be portrait as well and not  
> landscape,
> ConTeXt has
>   \definepapersize [RA3]  [\c!width=305mm,\c!height=430mm]
>   \definepapersize [SRA3]  [\c!width=320mm,\c!height=450mm]
>
>> From that point of view, the definition is correct.
>
> Tobias
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> _____________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an  
> entry to the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ 
> ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> _____________

Willi Egger
w.egger@boede.nl



___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

Am 2007-05-03 um 21:19 schrieb Willi Egger:

> Consider A4 which is portrait because of the grain direction
> (Laufrichtung) in the height. Otherwise A3 is two A4 and hence the
> grain direction is in the shorthand. - Generally speaking the
> graindirection is in the direction of the longer edge in all A-
> foomats with even numbers, including A0. - Looking in this way at RA3
> and SRA3 I would expect that the graindirection is also on the short
> side. Therefore The definition shoud be width=305 and height=430 mm
> and width=320 and height=450mm respectively.
>
> So Luigi you learned determination of the grain direction in Epen,
> please look this up in your two blocks!
>
> Kind regards Willi, the bookbinder ;-)

As a bookbinder you should know that you can get paper in both grain  
directions (even if one's much more usual).

ISO definitions of paper sizes are always portrait.

see also http://wiki.contextgarden.net/PaperSizes
I never heard of RA/SRA sizes before (doubt that they're  
standardized), but feel free to add them as soon as the wiki has moved.

Greetlings: Hraban, the printing engineer
---
http://www.fiee.net/texnique/
http://wiki.contextgarden.net
https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[luigi scarso]

> see also http://wiki.contextgarden.net/PaperSizes
wow!
> I never heard of RA/SRA sizes before (doubt that they're
> standardized),
hmm, see
http://www.edsebooks.com/paper/naukeupaper.html
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_217

-- 
luigi
----------------------------------------------------------------
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry
to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

Am 2007-05-04 um 14:51 schrieb luigi scarso:

>> see also http://wiki.contextgarden.net/PaperSizes
> wow!
>> I never heard of RA/SRA sizes before (doubt that they're
>> standardized),
> hmm, see
> http://www.edsebooks.com/paper/naukeupaper.html
> and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_217

Thank you! Looks like I've a lot to add to my collection...

(The paper sizes page was a start to collect traditional printing  
knowledge someplace where interested typographers would find it...)


Greetlings from Lake Constance!
Hraban
---
http://www.fiee.net/texnique/
http://wiki.contextgarden.net
https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[Patrick Gundlach]

[...]

> see also http://wiki.contextgarden.net/PaperSizes
> I never heard of RA/SRA sizes before (doubt that they're  
> standardized), but feel free to add them as soon as the wiki has moved.

It has moved - now I am waiting for the dns servers to update the new
IP. 

Patrick

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: Wrong SRA3 papersize ?

[luigi scarso]

On 5/3/07, Willi Egger <w.egger@boede.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is an interesting discussion. I admit, that I do not have the
> ultimate knowledge. Nevertheless I doubt whether the A3 format has to
> be considered portrait.

http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Image:SRA3.jpg
-- 
luigi
----------------------------------------------------------------
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry
to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________