emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
@ 2021-11-23 11:16 autofrettage
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: autofrettage @ 2021-11-23 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: emacs-orgmode

Hi,

If org mode won't blow up, kick out the restriction.

It is not up to us to decide what users will have use for or not. Besides, if someone specifies an outrageously wide picture by mistake, it's a mistake which is easy to spot and fix.

I finish my argument with a small war story. Many years ago  my colleagues and I tried to create a computational grid around a ship, for flow simulations. However, the grid generation program refused to follow our instructions, no matter what we tried. We reported this to the company behind the grid generation software, and it turned out they had imposed a 1000 m size limit on grids.

It just so happens that many merchant ships are almost 400 m long, and when you extend the computational grid sufficiently up- and downstream, you get a grid well over 1000 m long. Given the magnitude limit for double precision floating point numbers, 1000 m was a ridiculous limit.

yours
Rasmus


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
  2021-11-23  7:00   ` Matt Huszagh
  2021-11-23  7:01     ` Timothy
@ 2021-11-23  8:14     ` Tim Cross
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Tim Cross @ 2021-11-23  8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: emacs-orgmode


Matt Huszagh <huszaghmatt@gmail.com> writes:

> I agree that requesting an image to be >2x the buffer text width is a
> strange request, and it's not one I've ever tried to give. But, I think
> the salient point is that it's a very clear request, and I think org
> should carry it out. I'm all in favor of org helping people not shoot
> themselves in the foot, but I don't think it should prevent people from
> doing so, especially when they're clear about their intentions. I also
> think this qualifies as a case where someone /might/ have a valid reason
> for doing this.

+1M. We need to ensure org does not become too opinionated regarding
what is reasonable. If there is no good reason to impose an upper limit,
we should avoid doing so. Org is so powerful and open to customisation,
it is unlikely any of us can foresee all possible scenarios, so we need
to be careful not to artificially constrain the possibilities.   , 

>
> I guess we could make the upper limit customizable and default to
> 2.0. But, this is a bit confusing because it doesn't apply to the
> original image width. I also think adding too many customizable
> variables adds to complexity. I don't know. Thoughts? This also isn't a
> feature I've ever needed... so I'm happy to concede and revisit it in
> the future if I have a valid use case for it.
>

+1M. Org already has an excessive number of custom settings. We need to
actively avoid adding mor whenever we can. At first glance, a custom
variable seems to be a good option. However, once you take testing and
maintenance into consideration and think about the basic testing
principal of ensuring all possible paths are tested, you soon see why
adding such custom options really increases maintenance overhead.

If there is a legitimate technical reason to set an upper limit, then
that is fine. However, setting a limit because you cannot imagine anyone
wanting to go above it is probably not.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
  2021-11-23  7:01     ` Timothy
@ 2021-11-23  7:21       ` Matt Huszagh
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Matt Huszagh @ 2021-11-23  7:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Timothy; +Cc: , emacs-orgmode

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> It occurred to me that large values would only really appear when occurring in a
> narrower scope, e.g. in a multi-column document an image which is multiple
> columns wide. Say,
> ┌────
> │ #+attr_latex: 3.0\columnwidth
> └────
>
> However, I doubt that when previewing the image in Org one would want the
> preview to be 3x the buffer text area width!

Good point. I could see someone using this as an argument against
interpreting :width 3.0\columnwidth as :width 3.0, but I do see the
value in interpreting :width 0.8\linewidth as :width 0.8, so I don't
know.

> I suppose the exception would be say something like
> ┌────
> │ #+attr_org: :width 300%
> └────
> Though I can’t imagine why you’d want that…
>
> I think you don’t raise an unreasonable point, however I’m tempted to let this
> sit till we hear from someone who actually runs into this as an issue.

Yeah I think that makes sense. Thanks for considering this anyway!

Matt


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
  2021-11-23  7:00   ` Matt Huszagh
@ 2021-11-23  7:01     ` Timothy
  2021-11-23  7:21       ` Matt Huszagh
  2021-11-23  8:14     ` Tim Cross
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Timothy @ 2021-11-23  7:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matt Huszagh; +Cc: emacs-orgmode

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1286 bytes --]

Hi Matt,

> I agree that requesting an image to be >2x the buffer text width is a
> strange request, and it’s not one I’ve ever tried to give. But, I think
> the salient point is that it’s a very clear request, and I think org
> should carry it out. I’m all in favor of org helping people not shoot
> themselves in the foot, but I don’t think it should prevent people from
> doing so, especially when they’re clear about their intentions. I also
> think this qualifies as a case where someone /might/ have a valid reason
> for doing this.

It occurred to me that large values would only really appear when occurring in a
narrower scope, e.g. in a multi-column document an image which is multiple
columns wide. Say,
┌────
│ #+attr_latex: 3.0\columnwidth
└────

However, I doubt that when previewing the image in Org one would want the
preview to be 3x the buffer text area width!

I suppose the exception would be say something like
┌────
│ #+attr_org: :width 300%
└────
Though I can’t imagine why you’d want that…

I think you don’t raise an unreasonable point, however I’m tempted to let this
sit till we hear from someone who actually runs into this as an issue.

All the best,
Timothy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
  2021-11-23  6:17 ` Timothy
@ 2021-11-23  7:00   ` Matt Huszagh
  2021-11-23  7:01     ` Timothy
  2021-11-23  8:14     ` Tim Cross
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Matt Huszagh @ 2021-11-23  7:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Timothy; +Cc: , emacs-orgmode

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> Just to be clear, this isn’t preventing people from setting image widths to say
> `5.0\linewidth', it just prevents them from being previewed at 5x the buffer text
> width as that seems a bit ridiculous. Happy to reconsider the [0,2] preview
> restriction, but I don’t think ridiculously large in-buffer images make much
> sense.

Thanks for the response Timothy.

I agree that requesting an image to be >2x the buffer text width is a
strange request, and it's not one I've ever tried to give. But, I think
the salient point is that it's a very clear request, and I think org
should carry it out. I'm all in favor of org helping people not shoot
themselves in the foot, but I don't think it should prevent people from
doing so, especially when they're clear about their intentions. I also
think this qualifies as a case where someone /might/ have a valid reason
for doing this.

I guess we could make the upper limit customizable and default to
2.0. But, this is a bit confusing because it doesn't apply to the
original image width. I also think adding too many customizable
variables adds to complexity. I don't know. Thoughts? This also isn't a
feature I've ever needed... so I'm happy to concede and revisit it in
the future if I have a valid use case for it.

Matt


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
  2021-11-23  6:16 Matt Huszagh
@ 2021-11-23  6:17 ` Timothy
  2021-11-23  7:00   ` Matt Huszagh
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Timothy @ 2021-11-23  6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matt Huszagh; +Cc: emacs-orgmode

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 548 bytes --]

Hi Matt,

> I’m also not sure that we should prevent people from using
> 5.0, even if it is a bit odd. The intent is clear.
>
> Maybe I’m missing a reason as to why this is done?

Just to be clear, this isn’t preventing people from setting image widths to say
`5.0\linewidth', it just prevents them from being previewed at 5x the buffer text
width as that seems a bit ridiculous. Happy to reconsider the [0,2] preview
restriction, but I don’t think ridiculously large in-buffer images make much
sense.

All the best,
Timothy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area
@ 2021-11-23  6:16 Matt Huszagh
  2021-11-23  6:17 ` Timothy
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Matt Huszagh @ 2021-11-23  6:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: emacs-orgmode; +Cc: Timothy

Hi,

In org-display-inline-image--width we have the restriction that
percentages and floating point width specifications must be between 0
and 200% (or 0.0 and 2.0) of the text area. Reading the comments, it
sounds like this is done because you might specify something like
1.2\linewidth, but you wouldn't write something like 5.0\linewidth. I
guess that's fair, but I can't say with certainty that there is never
any valid reason to, e.g., specify that you want a width of 500% of the
text area. I'm also not sure that we should prevent people from using
5.0\linewidth, even if it is a bit odd. The intent is clear.

Maybe I'm missing a reason as to why this is done?

Best
Matt


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-11-23 11:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-11-23 11:16 Why is an image width restricted to being between 0 and 200% of the text area autofrettage
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-11-23  6:16 Matt Huszagh
2021-11-23  6:17 ` Timothy
2021-11-23  7:00   ` Matt Huszagh
2021-11-23  7:01     ` Timothy
2021-11-23  7:21       ` Matt Huszagh
2021-11-23  8:14     ` Tim Cross

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).