Software that makes placemats

[DRT]

Also beware that PermittedPackingStyles is being changed, a new version being likely to appear soon.

The anticipation is almost unbearable.

[Glenn E.]

I’ve slightly shrunk the default margins, from 36 pt = to 30 pt, which might have that effect. Let me test.

Edit: no. Could it be 8 glasses rather than 10, and /RectangularAlternateNudgeIf2pt (a recently constructed base style) rather than /PseudoHexagonal?

I could be mis-remembering 8 glasses in 3-2-3 arrangement. It would be from long enough ago that I doubt /RectangularAlternateNudgeIf2pt is the answer. I'll go back through my saved placemats when I get home tonight, but thought I'd ask since I'm attempting to put together another set of placemats at work today.

Records show that it was indeed 8 glasses in 3-2-3 arrangement that I was mis-remembering as 3-4-3. I have produced that twice on USL and once on USLegal. I have also produced 3-3-3 on USLegal, but when moving to 10 glasses the packing spreads to provide better room and switches to 3-2-3-2 (top to bottom).

[jdaw1]

Conclusion: happiness?

[Glenn E.]

Conclusion: happiness?

A more accurate description would be resignation.

I'm not fond of the layout with 10 glasses on /USLegal, but can accept it if it is the best that we can do. I realize that 10 glasses is approaching the physical limit for /USLegal, but I prefer more obvious rows so that it is easier to see the flights. If it were possible to force a 3-4-3 layout (which assumes that doing so fits on the paper) instead of the current 3-2-3-2 (top to bottom), that is what I would probably always choose for 10 glasses on /USLegal.

As is probably obvious, I don't have a problem with a much more densely packed placemat than what seems to be preferred in London.

[jdaw1]

Then delete from PermittedPackingStyles the arrangements you don't like. You have control.

[jdaw1]

Those deletions done, also def both RowsMinNum and RowsMaxNum to 3.

[Glenn E.]

Then delete from PermittedPackingStyles the arrangements you don't like. You have control.

I do.

/PermittedPackingStyles [ /PseudoHexagonal ] def

Is that not the correct style?

[Glenn E.]

Those deletions done, also def both RowsMinNum and RowsMaxNum to 3.

Aha! Most excellent. Yet again, proof that following this thread is good.

[Glenn E.]

Then delete from PermittedPackingStyles the arrangements you don't like. You have control.

/PermittedPackingStyles [ /PseudoHexagonal ] def

Those deletions done, also def both RowsMinNum and RowsMaxNum to 3.

/RowsMinNum 3 def
/RowsMaxNum 3 def

Confirmed. Much happiness.

[jdaw1]

For the prevention of future confusion, the PermittedPackingStyles parameter is about to be re-arranged, to a wider range of patterns, with control that both allows more detail, and is more logical.

And the incorrect name /PseudoHexagonal will be changed to /Diamonds, as shorter and more accurate.

But, broadly, the overall approach won’t change. The machine will go through the allowed patterns, choosing the one with the largest radius, that is, the most densely packed.

Broadly? The user will be able to specify, for each pattern, an ImprovementPointsMin and ImprovementProportionMin. The thinking is that these can be specified in patterns the user likes less (for me, /RectangularAlternateNudge), which will be used only if materially better than the others. Materially? For this base style, the defaults might be 2 and 0.02, so to be selected the radius must be better by both 2pt ≈ 0.7mm, and by 2%.

The likes of RowsMinNum and RowsMaxNum will be specifiable at the level of a pattern, rather the globally.

[jdaw1]

the incorrect name /PseudoHexagonal will be changed to /Diamonds, as shorter and more accurate.

/Gaia is also a nonsensical name. Please suggest a name for the class of styles of which the following are canonical examples.

[PhilW]

/Gaia is also a nonsensical name. Please suggest a name for the class of styles of which the following are canonical examples.

/Arch

[jdaw1]

/Arch

This has a flat top, whereas an arch is curved. But the idea of an architectural term is excellent.

[PhilW]

/Arch

This has a flat top, whereas an arch is curved. But the idea of an architectural term is excellent.

I thought that arches could theoretically be flat (or variety of other shapes), with curved simply being the most common form? i.e. architecturally, does it not simply require to be an opening where the top is weight-bearing?
Otherwise perhaps /PseudoArch as per previous /PseudoHexagonal.

[jdaw1]

Fair, but insufficient. The under-development pattern currently known as /SemiEllipse has the curved nature that feels more ‘arch’y. So it would be better to capture more decisively the flatness of the top.

[djewesbury]

I merely note the following;

John Ruskin notes many different shapes of arch in his seminal The Stones of Venice.

An Orange arch is flat-topped, albeit with some sort of illustration of a curve on the lintel.

Lintel might in fact be appropriate although that is only the top straight part.

Or PseudoLintel or PseudoDoorway. Or OpenRectangle.

Ah - a proscenium arch is flat-topped. Proscenium?

[jdaw1]

Proscenium?

Pretentious? Qui, moi?

[djewesbury]

Proscenium?

Pretentious? Qui, moi?

Alright then, PseudoProscenium..
I can think of no better peri-architectural term to describe the shape you have presented us with.<sup>1

1</sup> ...with which you have presented us.

[jdaw1]

‟Pretentious? Qui, moi?” was not a criticism. But, for my taste, ‟/Lintel” is currently winning. Maybe it should be /PostsAndLintel, but brevity is desired.

[djewesbury]

‟Pretentious? Qui, moi?” was not a criticism. But, for my taste, ‟/Lintel” is currently winning. Maybe it should be /PostsAndLintel, but brevity is desired.

/PostsAndLintel has a certain ring to it.. And it's immediately clear.

[Glenn E.]

/perimeter

[jdaw1]

/perimeter

Might that be thought to include the bottom edge?

[Glenn E.]

/perimeter

Might that be thought to include the bottom edge?

Hmm. Yes, it probably would.

/DodrantPerimeter?

[djewesbury]

/perimeter

Might that be thought to include the bottom edge?

Hmm. Yes, it probably would.

/DodrantPerimeter?

Et maintenant, qui est prétentieux?

[Glenn E.]

/perimeter

Might that be thought to include the bottom edge?

Hmm. Yes, it probably would.

/DodrantPerimeter?

Et maintenant, qui est prétentieux?

I have no idea what you're talking about.