Map previews not preserved when indirectly referenced
As far as I can see, the following map definitions should each produce identical pdf outputs, because the second definition is just calling the first; map Late08PreviewBulmerPlanMap \ -projection plan preview above BeautifulBulmerPlanMap@Bulmer Late08PlanMap@Bulmer endmap map Late08OffsetPreviewBulmerPlanMap \ -projection plan Late08PreviewBulmerPlanMap # [200 000 m] none endmap However the preview is produced over the passage with the first definition and not with the second. Why is this and what do I need to do to see the preview with the second syntax? If I remove the # in the second to last line, then I should see an identical output (with a preview AND passage) offset 200m, but again I get the passage only. Again, the same question? (Note that the 'none' is intentional as it relates to the preview of the passage in it's original location, not the previewed passage in the new location - this aspect is working correctly) Any ideas on this? Has been like this from about 5.2.6 thru 5.2.10 Cheers Bruce
Why is this and what do I need to do to see the preview with the second syntax?
It is a long time ago. First I did it as you expected, but then I realized, that inheritance of previews was doing problems. It was much easier to specify at each level of maps, what should be above and what should be below. Is it doing a huge problem for you?
If I remove the # in the second to last line, then I should see an identical output (with a preview AND passage) offset 200m, but again I get the passage only.
Displaying maps in offset was intended to be used only in very rare cases. I have never thought of displaying also previews in the offset. But I can imagine, that in some cases it would be useful. Probably best solution would be if preview inheritance could be turned on/off by some switch. Would it solve your problems? Regards, S.
Sorry for the long reply Stacho, Firstly perhaps we should check that my 'understanding' is OK. Are you saying in effect that map m123 in the current therion book page 92-93 cannot be generated with the sample code provided for the same reason my example does not work? Or the m123 example is OK, and my way of doing it is different and 'not preferred'? Is it the difference between the two syntax' mapname [x y] below, and preview below mapname? Is one preferred over another?
It is a long time ago. First I did it as you expected, but then I realized, that inheritance of previews was doing problems. It was much easier to specify at each level of maps, what should be above and what should be below. Is it doing a huge problem for you?
I'm not sure. I need to get my mind around how I might do it differently.
Displaying maps in offset was intended to be used only in very rare cases. I had figured this was the case with atlas outputs. Atlas work much better without offsets because the hyperlinks up and down a level are automatically generated (do you call these chapters?), but I think offsets may work out if used carefully for small pieces of cave only. I agree with the rarely though.
Offsets seem to work OK in map outputs however. I have a couple of larger cave systems 'under construction' where there are sections of passage 500m to 1.5km long that directly overlie one another. (Funny thing with caves - seems to happen a lot) The offsets generally seem to behave themselves, although I am hoping not to have very many offsets within offsets. Tends to hurt my brain.
I have never thought of displaying also previews in the offset. But I can imagine, that in some cases it would be useful.
Is that not what the m123 example is doing? I concede that the previews are being propagated in one 'direction'. Is this related to the 'revise' command reference on page 31 of the therion book. I have not being able to grasp how to use revise in this context.
Probably best solution would be if preview inheritance could be turned on/off by some switch. Would it solve your problems?
Yes, depending on the problems it might cause :) I am hoping that the preview (very large) extent will be clipped by the extent of the (smaller) offset passage. Thanks Bruce
Is it the difference between the two syntax' mapname [x y] below, and preview below mapname? Is one preferred over another?
It is different:
mapname [x y] below, and
will generate a map (named mapname) shifted x y and on the original place only "below" preview of mapname will be displayed.
preview below mapname?
will generate only the preview, "mapname" will not be displayed.
I have never thought of displaying also previews in the offset. But I can imagine, that in some cases it would be useful.
Is that not what the m123 example is doing?
No, because there the preview is just caused by another offset, not "preview" option in the map.
Probably best solution would be if preview inheritance could be turned on/off by some switch. Would it solve your problems?
Yes, depending on the problems it might cause :) I am hoping that the preview (very large) extent will be clipped by the extent of the (smaller) offset passage.
OK, I will put it on the TODO list. May be it will not be too complicated... Regards, S.
Thanks for the explanation and the offer Stacho
Is that not what the m123 example is doing? No, because there the preview is just caused by another offset, not "preview" option in the map.
The above was the bit that clarified why they were different.
Probably best solution would be if preview inheritance could be turned on/off by some switch. Would it solve your problems? OK, I will put it on the TODO list. May be it will not be too complicated...
If it's related and not too hard (and not already completed)- allowing sketches to be offset as well would be nice. Thanks Bruce
participants (2)
-
Bruce Mutton -
Stacho Mudrak