Re: @image for pdf and html

[daniela-spit]

> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 at 10:55 PM
> From: "Gavin Smith" <gavinsmith0123@gmail.com>
> To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> Cc: "help-texinfo gnu" <help-texinfo@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: @image for pdf and html
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:11:09PM +0100, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > It has been figured that we cannot use the same file for both
> > pdf/dvi output and html output.  Because if the file has too many
> > pixels, the image will be too big for html.  We could end up with
> > many calls to image with different files using @iftex and @ifhtml.
>
> You could equally say it's too big for pdf, if the pdf is going to
> put online.  It's the same image either way.

It is html that is limiting resolution, thus capability must be discussed when
compared to pdf output.  Html provides serious limitations, unlike in pdf
where you can select the width and height.  In geology based manual, the 
resolution
is the most important aspect of any image.

> I don't see anything wrong with using conditionals for different
> output formats to specify different image files, if that is what
> is desired.

There is nothing wrong.  However geology based manuals inherently
have many images, and defining for both is an extremely cumbersome
proposition. Besides the fact that images in html have limited use
because of the number of pixel limitation.  Otherwise you cannot
see the text.