On 06/11/14 16:43, Jack wrote:
On 2014.11.06 07:22, Allan wrote:
I'm working on [Bug 340656] New: The csv importer dialog display is
broken on high DPI screens.
Originally, on my system, I had not specified a specific setting for
DPI, and I was using the default, which I think was 96. The OP
reported "This happens on a high DPI screen for which I had to force
the fonts DPI to 168.", and I am not at the moment clear if he
intended/needed to use that setting, or actually had to resort to
that. I found there was certainly a problem at 168, so I'm assuming
that that was the setting he wanted to use.
I've now have it working at this setting, but if I go above that then
problems return, and font sizes need to be reduced. In some places,
this responds to the new font size setting, but in some cases the
original size remains and recompilation is needed.
So, what setting is reasonable for me to use? The higher settings
look like it might be good for making posters.
Allan
As has been said before, you should not need to (and generally should
not) specify such things.
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Whilst I did mention font size,
that is not the issue.
In the past, I've never needed to think about DPI settings, except when
dealing with image files/printers, or if I did, it was many, many moons
ago. I'm trying to fix the user's problem, where, for whatever reason,
he needed/chose to use a high-ish setting, the result of which is that
the characters displayed become larger and take up more visual space.
So, I need to ensure that I allow for that. So, I set my system DPI
setting to some higher value, not a font setting. I can test for the
168 DPI value, but while I'm at it, and we know what will happen next -
another user will need higher, so how much further is it sensible to go?
The provided choices go up to 1000DPI. So just for fun, I've just
used that. Now, I can't get to the choice of importer as the KMM
opening screen has just six text lines filling the screen, with a few
tiny icons interspersed. The text characters are too big, and this is
the point where I tried a choice of reducing the font size. The
smallest choice is still useless.
So, I suspect that the largest DPI settings are for use if one has a
huge screen for use in a huge room.
It looks like I have to 'suck it and see'. If KMM gives a
reasonable/usable result, I'll go with that, probably.
Allan
The issue with fonts is that there are often
subtle misconfiguration of display systems. A monitor has a real size
(inches or mm), a real number of pixels, and a DPI. You really only get
to specify two, and from those calculate the third. Since the first two
are physical attributes of the monitor, they (in theory at least) should
take priority. However, for various reasons, DPI is sometimes
specified, potentially leading to conflicts - i.e., it's sometimes not
true that size of display in inches X DPI = number of pixels.
The problem with fonts is that you can specify them in pixels or by
physical size (72 points = 1 inch, an old printers measure). Only if
all three of the above parameters are actually correct will this work.
In addition, specifying either size or pixels for a font will simply be
wrong on some display. 10 point type may be too large on a phone or
small tablet, and will probably be too small on a 35 inch display.
Likewise if you specify pixels. You really have to assume the user has
the display configured correctly, and that the default font size will be
appropriate. You can then specify "smaller" or "larger," but both are
relative to the default font, not to any fixed baseline.
Unless you query this display parameters, I believe any attempt to
specify font sizes will be wrong for some set of users. By specifying a
font family (serif v. sans, roman v. italic, bold v. plain, narrow v.
normal or wide) you can get a particular look, and might even get a good
idea of the aspect ratio of what you are displaying, but beyond that
lies trouble.
For the specific user you refer to, it doesn't really tell us anything
that he needed 168 DPI. It depends on his monitor size and resolution,
and whether they were set correctly. Adjusting DPI is simply a post-hoc
way of getting a useful output when something was specified in a way
that was not appropriate for that display. Setting your own display to
168 DPI doesn't really change the display, it just changes the
calculations used to draw the fonts - and that depends on whether the
underlying font being displayed is actually specified by pixels (any
bit-mapped font) or in inches/points (true-type fonts, for example, if I
remember correctly.)
I apologize if this sounds like a rant, but as displays have gotten both
large and small, and unless you actually have a way of knowing about the
display you are currently running on, and using that information, font
size is likely to remain a problem. Projection devices are yet another
twist, since pixels are fixed but actual size depends on distance from
the projector to the screen, and sizes can't be thought of in the usual
way, since the people viewing the display are at a distance - so a true
10point type would be miniscule.
I suspect this is also at least peripherally related to the system
choosing which size icon to use, and why most icons are created and
installed in a range of sizes. In general, you do not specify which
size icon to use on a particular screen or dialog, but let the system
choose the appropriate size. I wonder if we will ever get icons
specified by rendering (e.g., svg) rather than bitmapped. If so, the
issues become more parallel to fonts.
Jack
_______________________________________________
KMyMoney-devel mailing list
KMyMoney-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmymoney-devel
