Re: [boost] [documentation] Are SVG's in documentation viable now?

Subject: Re: [boost] [documentation] Are SVG's in documentation viable now?
From: Marco Guazzone (marco.guazzone_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-10 07:17:36

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:27 PM, John Maddock <boost.regex_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> It looks to me like the PNG's are anti-aliased, but the SVG's aren't, which
> would probably be a display setting or something?
>

I've just looked in my window manager settings and anti-alias is enabled.

> In any case, I've tried them again slightly larger than before
> (http://jzmaddock.github.io/doctest/html/svg_test/equations.html) is this
> any better?
>
Better than before, but not wrt PNG (IMO)
This is the result in Firefox

http://imagebin.ca/v/1k9P4HIJQMdV

For instance:
- Greek symbols: some of the special greek symbols (pi, epsilon,...)
looks clearer in PNG. For example, compare $\pi$ in
"bernoulli_numbers2" and $\varepsilon$ in "sinh3"
- Spacing: it seems SVG formulas are more narrow and math symbols are
closer than their PNG counterparts. For example, compare the
$\cos\phi$ and $\sin\phi$ expressions in the "bessel_derivatives3". On
the SVG side, The $\cos$ ($\sin$) is very close to $\phi$, while on
the PNG side there is a little space that makes the expression more
readable (IMO).

Anyway, aside these small issues, I vote for the transition to SVG ;)
I think that my issues are motivated by your note in the original
email "... the equations reference Window's specific fonts,...".
So this can be easily solved in the future

Cheers,

-- Marco