lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Reduce size of PDF files when inc. in *TeX docs (issue 194090043 by


From: Knut Petersen
Subject: Re: Reduce size of PDF files when inc. in *TeX docs (issue 194090043 by address@hidden)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 08:55:50 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0

On 12.01.2015 06:56, address@hidden wrote:

https://codereview.appspot.com/194090043/diff/20001/Documentation/usage/running.itely
File Documentation/usage/running.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/194090043/diff/20001/Documentation/usage/running.itely#newcode187
Documentation/usage/running.itely:187: font data which can make
significant reductions in file size.
One point is missing: Why is the option called --bigpdfs if the we get
significant reductions in file size?

We include up to three full copies (with different encoding vectors) for every emmentaler font used instead of one newly contructed font that includes only the subset of emmentaler glyphs used by the document. For all other fonts ghostscript is told to avoid subsettting whenever it is possible. That all means that the file size of the pdfs produced by lilypond itselb increases dramatically.

--bigpdfs is a name that describes the most visible effect of this code. It 
discourages the normal user, but that's not a bad effect. If you don't know why 
you want to use this option you probably don't have a reason to use it.

--optpdfs would be misleading, and I have some ideas how to optimize pdf output.

A class of possible names is related to the implementation details:

Something like --dont_subset_fonts_use_emmentaler_via-encoding_vectors would be 
technically correct but much to long.

--nofontsubsetting, --useencodings, --avoidglyphshow would emphasize only parts 
of the technical details.

Another class of possible names would emphasize the intended use:

--optimze_for_inclusion_in_TeX_if_you_include_multiple_lilypond_pdfs would be 
much to long but self-explanatory.

--texsnip would be short enough and based on the intended use, and -t isn't used up to 
now.<http://dict.leo.org/#/search=self-explanatory&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on>

A name that discourages Fred Foobar form using it unless he has read about it 
in the documentation and knows why he wants to use it is a good name, therefore 
I still like --bigpdfs.

cu,
 Knut



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]