Software that makes placemats

[DRT]

I like the document outline but have just noticed the external links section, which is a splendid addition.

[jdaw1]

Placemats printed.

Hitherto, when placemats have been printed, they have been deemed finished the online edition being frozen at the printed version.

But with the new ExternalLinks feature, there are placemat parameters that don’t affect what prints. There would be advantages in adding to the placemats a link to the review thread, as that thread has, front and prominent, all the links one could want.

Do users object to post-printing changes to the uploaded placemats, provided that the new version would print the same as the printed version?

Please vote one of:

• ‘Purist’ (the printed version is the final version);
• ‘Near-Purist’ (later uploads must be of something that would print the same to paper);
• Other (detail).

My preference is Near-Purist, but I might be persuaded by interesting argument.

[DRT]

I vote Near-Purist, but do wonder what sort of geek would find it necessary to print a set of placemats for a tasting that had already happened.

[jdaw1]

but do wonder what sort of geek would find it necessary to print a set of placemats for a tasting that had already happened.

That’s not quite the point, I think. The online placemats are part of the record of the tasting. Records are important. (Some might recall that DRT and I are meant to be writing a book based on various records relating to port.)

To what extent can we retrospectively change this ‘record’? My view is slightly, not so much as to change the print, and only very soon after the tasting. It isn’t quite purist, but nearly so.

[DRT]

but do wonder what sort of geek would find it necessary to print a set of placemats for a tasting that had already happened.

That’s not quite the point, I think. The online placemats are part of the record of the tasting. Records are important. (Some might recall that DRT and I are meant to be writing a book based on various records relating to port.)

To what extent can we retrospectively change this ‘record’? My view is slightly, not so much as to change the print, and only very soon after the tasting. It isn’t quite purist, but nearly so.

I knew that the answer was "us"

[PhilW]

I'd vote purist, warts and all as necessary; it's the record of the event, with any notes or additional links provided in the review thread(s), rather than the corrected/updated event arrangements. Once you start adding extra helpful links, you risk incremental feature creep (links to tasting notes, WOTN scores etc); Perhaps that would only be appropriate for circumstances where you require the document to be the master record for the complete event, e.g. non-TPF use where these might be no associated forum etc?

[SushiNorth]

Purist+Other:

Purist: If the placemat is a historical document used to understand what happened at a tasting, it is important that it remains unaltered after the event. While one might only be adding links to the review, removing some embarrassing detail on the tasting sheet which caused great discussion would be too tempting. Similarly, if the website upgraded or moved, and the links changed, would we need to keep the placemat updated in perpetuity?

Other: If the placemat is not a historical document, but simply a tool we use to execute the tastings planned and recorded here on the site, then its accuracy and valuable content -- beyond the event -- is irrelevant. Are our placemats being stored and backed up? Are they ever revisited? I'd prefer that, so long as the website exists, the website be the authoritative source on what transpired at the tasting. And should the website cease to exist, the links on placemats would be useless.

[RAYC]

Don't think I understand the debate here, but:

What if a port emergency is declared at the end of the night and another bottle is added? Or there's a guest who turns up at the last minute with an extra bottle? The placemats as printed are no longer a historical record of events. Including the extra information somewhere at the back (but so that the actual placemats remain" as printed" seems neat.

[jdaw1]

Are our placemats being stored and backed up?

The British Library archives copies of jdawiseman.com. These copies are derived by following the links from the home page, and the manual links to some but not all placemats. I could add a page listing all the placemats, so that all are archived.

PhilW and SushiNorth make a powerful argument (‟would be too tempting”; ‟incremental feature creep”; etc). Are these arguments lessened by self-restraint on the part of jdaw1? Surely a bit. But are they lessened enough?

So far the score is as follows.
• Purist: 2 (SushiNorth, PhilW);
• Near-Purist: 3 (jdaw1, DRT, RAYC).
My vote was a close call, and RAYC denies understanding, so that is statistically indistinguishable from a draw.

[jdaw1]

I could add a page listing all the placemats, so that all are archived.

Done. Henceforth the British Library will find all these.

[SushiNorth]

I could add a page listing all the placemats, so that all are archived.

Done. Henceforth the British Library will find all these.

Is this list intended to include all TPF Tastings, and if so would it be useful to DL the ones that we've done in NYC for inclusion in that archive?

[jdaw1]

Is this list intended to include all TPF Tastings, and if so would it be useful to DL the ones that we've done in NYC for inclusion in that archive?

If not on a ‘British’ website that the BL archives, it would retain the links but not archive the content.

I intended it to be for placemats made by me and held at www.jdawiseman.com. Maybe that could be expanded.

[jdaw1]

During the tasting on Tue 11 Oct 2011, five changes to the software were requested.

• At DRT’s request, HeaderRightText no longer depends on any other parameters, making it easier to move it to the top.
• Based on a suggestion of PhilW, BackgroundTextsGlassesPaintCode changed from 25% black to 6¼% black.  
• When RAYC prints, he prints the placenames to card. This is stiff enough to require one fold rather than three, so PlaceNamesFirstAndThirdFoldsFromEdge should be set to zero. I promised to add a feature that checked this parameter’s equality to zero, and if so, not to print the lines and instructions. Except that this was already being checked in just this manner. So, no change to software required. But note to self: if RAYC is to print then set /PlaceNamesFirstAndThirdFoldsFromEdge 0 def.
• I noticed that the ‘which shipper’ sheet still had the instruction ‟Record points, not rank.” These words have been moved to the parameter VoteRecorderInstruction.
• RAYC requested a sheet on which corks and cork fragments could be put, both for photography and for observation by others. This has not yet been done, whilst I ponder the range of variations that might be wanted.

And a bonus:

• All placemats now include a link to this thread.

[PhilW]

[*]Based on a suggestion of PhilW, BackgroundTextsGlassesPaintCode changed from 25% black to 6¼% black.

I would also suggest reducing their overall (font) size to 80% of current, and either increasing the line width by 40% or possible solid filling the characters (at 6.25 or 5%)

[jdaw1]

increasing the line width by 40%

Increased by a factor of 1.5.

[jdaw1]

• RAYC requested a sheet on which corks and cork fragments could be put, both for photography and for observation by others. This has not yet been done, whilst I ponder the range of variations that might be wanted.

I think that parameters needed are as follows:

• /CorkDisplay true def, saying whether or not to bother.
• /GlassesClusteredOnCorkDisplay GlassesClusteredOnDecantingNotes def, saying which glasses go there;
• CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight, being minimum sizes.

Then the code works out how many can go on each sheet. Each is a rectangle, surrounded by the Circlearrays text, very small, and containing, larger but not very large, the various title-like texts. Sheets would be discretely titled ‟The Corks”.

Does that work?

[RAYC]

• RAYC requested a sheet on which corks and cork fragments could be put, both for photography and for observation by others. This has not yet been done, whilst I ponder the range of variations that might be wanted.

I think that parameters needed are as follows:

• /CorkDisplay true def, saying whether or not to bother.
• /GlassesClusteredOnCorkDisplay GlassesClusteredOnDecantingNotes def, saying which glasses go there;
• CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight, being minimum sizes.

Then the code works out how many can go on each sheet. Each is a rectangle, surrounded by the Circlearrays text, very small, and containing, larger but not very large, the various title-like texts. Sheets would be discretely titled ‟The Corks”.

Does that work?

Sounds great - if it's ready in time, i can try next month for the GC-SW-QH tasting. But i appreciate this is non-essential!

[jdaw1]

• RAYC requested a sheet on which corks and cork fragments could be put, both for photography and for observation by others. This has not yet been done, whilst I ponder the range of variations that might be wanted.

Work has started. This work has revealed that the same chunk of code, with very small changes, appears four times in the current version. It is being wrapped into a sub-routine, perhaps to be called CirclearrayInStraightLine, to do the same a little better. This will result in a minor improvement to the tasting-note pages, as well as being used in cork-display pages. Rejoice!

[PhilW]

The value "/NonDecanterLabelGlassesNumCopies 1 def" appears a few lines below the comment "% Non-Glasses Pages %". Changing this value to zero appears to stop the glasses pages from being printed. Is this as intended, or what is this variable intended to control?

Also, perhaps a trivial detail but - is there a setting to define the width of any exclusion area on the glasses sheets between the outer ring of text as defined by circlearrays and the inner text defined by titles, belowtitles? In a couple of cases experimenting I found that the inner text can (virtually) meet the outer, and therefore by allowing optionally configurable decrease of the effective inner circle size (in which the title/belowtitle are sized and placed) by a small degree (say <=5%, configurable, or a fixed amount e.g. 1mm) might help clarity?

On a PC the specification of NotePad++ looks encouraging user feedback welcomed

I use Notepad++ daily and find it is an excellent context-sensitive-highlighting text editor for use with many languages including postscript (though I hadn't used it for that particular language before today, I use it for several others regularly); highly recommended.

[jdaw1]

The value "/NonDecanterLabelGlassesNumCopies 1 def" appears a few lines below the comment "% Non-Glasses Pages %". Changing this value to zero appears to stop the glasses pages from being printed. Is this as intended, or what is this variable intended to control?

This might be slightly mis-placed, but does what it seems to do. Why, oh why? Because several page types, including decanter labels and pre-pour and sticky-labels, contain extracts from the glasses pages. If there are no glasses pages, there cannot be sticky labels. But what if!? Then have glasses pages, and show 0 copies of them.

Also, perhaps a trivial detail but - is there a setting to define the width of any exclusion area on the glasses sheets between the outer ring of text as defined by circlearrays and the inner text defined by titles, belowtitles? In a couple of cases experimenting I found that the inner text can (virtually) meet the outer, and therefore by allowing optionally configurable decrease of the effective inner circle size (in which the title/belowtitle are sized and placed) by a small degree (say <=5%, configurable, or a fixed amount e.g. 1mm) might help clarity?

They can indeed touch. Such a parameter could be added, though I think it should be expressed a proportion of one of the radii (Radii, RadiiCirclearrayBaseline, or RadiiCirclearrayInside). Suggest a name for the parameter. (Edit: though the boundaries of the Titles etc are separately constrained if there are decanter labels, and of course common sizing will also shrink some.)

On a PC the specification of NotePad++ looks encouraging user feedback welcomed

I use Notepad++ daily and find it is an excellent context-sensitive-highlighting text editor for use with many languages including postscript (though I hadn't used it for that particular language before today, I use it for several others regularly); highly recommended.

Thank you: manual updated.

[PhilW]

The value "/NonDecanterLabelGlassesNumCopies 1 def" appears a few lines below the comment "% Non-Glasses Pages %". Changing this value to zero appears to stop the glasses pages from being printed. Is this as intended, or what is this variable intended to control?

This might be slightly mis-placed, but does what it seems to do. Why, oh why? Because several page types, including decanter labels and pre-pour and sticky-labels, contain extracts from the glasses pages. If there are no glasses pages, there cannot be sticky labels. But what if!? Then have glasses pages, and show 0 copies of them.

In that case I wouldn't suggest it was mis-placed, but perhaps a change of name to something like "/InhibitGlassesPagePrinting" for clarity?

Also, perhaps a trivial detail but - is there a setting to define the width of any exclusion area on the glasses sheets between the outer ring of text as defined by circlearrays and the inner text defined by titles, belowtitles? In a couple of cases experimenting I found that the inner text can (virtually) meet the outer, and therefore by allowing optionally configurable decrease of the effective inner circle size (in which the title/belowtitle are sized and placed) by a small degree (say <=5%, configurable, or a fixed amount e.g. 1mm) might help clarity?

They can indeed touch. Such a parameter could be added, though I think it should be expressed a proportion of one of the radii (Radii, RadiiCirclearrayBaseline, or RadiiCirclearrayInside). Suggest a name for the parameter. (Edit: though the boundaries of the Titles etc are separately constrained if there are decanter labels, and of course common sizing will also shrink some.)

If I've understood the current variables correctly - Radii being the radius to the outside of the circlearray text, and RadiiCircleArrayInside to be the radius to the inside of the circlearray text - then I'd suggest RadiiCirclearrayInsideMargin with default either zero (to print as current) or 0.025 (to provide a 2.5% (radially) gap).

[jdaw1]

In that case I wouldn't suggest it was mis-placed, but perhaps a change of name to something like "/InhibitGlassesPagePrinting" for clarity?

Good clarity (though elsewhere I have used !Suppress!); but removes the ≥2 functionality. For what would one want the ≥2 functionality? Hmmm. Not sure. Perhaps for a tasting on a train, in which spillage is expected and substitutions desired? Hmmm.

If I've understood the current variables correctly - Radii being the radius to the outside of the circlearray text, and RadiiCircleArrayInside to be the radius to the inside of the circlearray text - then I'd suggest RadiiCirclearrayInsideMargin with default either zero (to print as current) or 0.025 (to provide a 2.5% (radially) gap).

You have understood, though the name might need to be nearer to the rather horrible TitlesEtcInsideMarginProportionRadiiCirclearrayInside.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Oh no! More of a thread that might as well be written in Greek for all my understanding.

Perhaps I should reactivate the thread on the technicalities of cricket...

[jdaw1]

You should delight that, at no effort to yourself, TPF’s finest minds are keeping me in check. Express joy.

[Alex Bridgeman]

You should delight that, at no effort to yourself, TPF’s finest minds are keeping me in check. Express joy.

This is true. I apologise for my earlier, churlish comment. My thanks and appreciation go to those able to contribute meaningfully to this thread and keep Julian challenged and in check.

[Alex Bridgeman]

You should delight that, at no effort to yourself, TPF’s finest minds are keeping me in check. Express joy.

This is true. I apologise for my earlier, churlish comment. My thanks and appreciation go to those able to contribute meaningfully to this thread and keep Julian challenged and in check.

I raise a glass of port to the good health of you all. Cheers!

[jdaw1]

In a sheet for displaying corks, what should be the default minimum space required per cork? Three inches across? And how much vertical space? (The algorithm will be efficient about space usage, but the minima are important.)

[jdaw1]

if it's ready in time, i can try next month for the GC-SW-QH tasting. But i appreciate this is non-essential!

Updated draft of the placemats.

• +Cork display sheets, as requested.

The manual has not yet been updated, but will be soon.

I hope that people appreciate that this functionality diminished my cellar by a very fine bottle of T77. The sacrifices one makes.

[jdaw1]

The manual has not yet been updated, but will be soon.

Some minor fixes to the new code, and manual updated. Please use the latest code.

[RAYC]

I hope that people appreciate that this functionality diminished my cellar by a very fine bottle of T77. The sacrifices one makes.

Probably not as much as you appreciated it!

[jdaw1]

I have an algorithm problem.

We need a known number of cork-display rectangles, this being computed using CorkDisplayNumCopies and CorkDisplaySpaceForNumExtras. We need to compute how many rows and columns go on each page, subject to CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight.

So the code loops over /Portrait and /Landscape, computing available space, and loop over numbers of rows and columns:
• Preferring possibilities that meet the CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight constraints.
• Within those, preferring those requiring as few pages as possible.
• Within those, preferring those for which each rectangle has maximal area.

It’s not bad, but the area preference is wrong, because it has no bias towards rectangles being of the ratio implied by the minima (tall and thin being unhelpful, for example). So, relabelling the minima as H and W, both positive, I want to maximise over positive h and w a function f[h,w,H,W] satisfying:
• f[h,w,H,W] = f[w,h,W,H];
• ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂h > 0;
• ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂w > 0;
• w/W > h/H ⇔ ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂h > ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂w, equality implying equality.
What should be f[!]? I’m stumped. Suggestions please.

[RAYC]

I have an algorithm problem.

We need a known number of cork-display rectangles, this being computed using CorkDisplayNumCopies and CorkDisplaySpaceForNumExtras. We need to compute how many rows and columns go on each page, subject to CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight.

So the code loops over /Portrait and /Landscape, computing available space, and loop over numbers of rows and columns:
• Preferring possibilities that meet the CorkDisplayMinWidth and CorkDisplayMinHeight constraints.
• Within those, preferring those requiring as few pages as possible.
• Within those, preferring those for which each rectangle has maximal area.

It’s not bad, but the area preference is wrong, because it has no bias towards rectangles being of the ratio implied by the minima (tall and thin being unhelpful, for example). So, relabelling the minima as H and W, both positive, I want to maximise over positive h and w a function f[h,w,H,W] satisfying:
• f[h,w,H,W] = f[w,h,W,H];
• ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂h > 0;
• ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂w > 0;
• w/W > h/H ⇔ ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂h > ∂f[h,w,H,W]/∂w, equality implying equality.
What should be f[!]? I’m stumped. Suggestions please.

I suggest the formation of a working group chaired by AHB

[PhilW]

What should be f[!]? I’m stumped. Suggestions please.

Perhaps:
f(h,w)=wh/(ah+bw) for all h>=H,w>=W else 0 (invalid)
where a,b are positive constants essentially defining the ideal ratio; a>b, perhaps a=kb where k>1.0, likely ~2.

[Alex Bridgeman]

I suggest the formation of a working group chaired by AHB

I would be delighted to chair such a group, hereby known as the Taylor '77 Working Group.

[jdaw1]

An opening question for the Taylor 1977 Working Group (‘T77WG’?):

In a sheet for displaying corks, what should be the default minimum space required per cork? Three inches across? And how much vertical space? (The algorithm will be efficient about space usage, but the minima are important.)

We need the help of somebody who is expert in the handling of broken corks.

[Alex Bridgeman]

My suggestion would be to use a minimum length of 3 inches and a minimum width of 2 inches. These dimensions should allow all pieces of a fragmented cork to be reasonably contained in the rectangle.

[jdaw1]

So you prefer a portrait display to landscape? I am surprised.

[jdaw1]

f(h,w)=wh/(ah+bw)

An excellent form. It doesn’t quote solve the problem as asked, but if one is instead differentiating with respect to Ln[h] and Ln[w], so considering proportionate increases, it works well.

f[h,w,H,W] = h w /( W h + H w ), or ”“1 if the denominator is ≤0.

This is increasing in both h and w. It can be rearranged to be a constant times a function of (h/H) and (w/W), and is faster increasing in the smaller of these.

Thank you. To be implemented at the next opportunity.

[Alex Bridgeman]

So you prefer a portrait display to landscape? I am surprised.

I've mentally tried both layouts and while I don't feel very strongly one way or the other, I did find myself naturally holding a sheet of A4 in portrait form as the more natural form. However, i do accept that others may feel more strongly inclined to the landscape format.

[jdaw1]

Think not of the paper, but of the rectangle to hold the cork or cork pieces. That rectangle could be landscape, even on a portrait page (e.g., two columns and four rows). Should the rectangle be portrait or landscape?

[PhilW]

f(h,w)=wh/(ah+bw)

An excellent form. It doesn’t quote solve the problem as asked, but if one is instead differentiating with respect to Ln[h] and Ln[w], so considering proportionate increases, it works well.

f[h,w,H,W] = h w /( W h + H w ), or ”“1 if the denominator is ≤0.

This is increasing in both h and w. It can be rearranged to be a constant times a function of (h/H) and (w/W), and is faster increasing in the smaller of these.

Thank you. To be implemented at the next opportunity.

Minor note
f[h,w,H,W] = h w /( W h + aH w )
where a>0 (or scaled by rearrangement) would allow for the optimum proportion being potentially different from the ratio of the minimum values.

Think not of the paper, but of the rectangle to hold the cork or cork pieces. That rectangle could be landscape, even on a portrait page (e.g., two columns and four rows). Should the rectangle be portrait or landscape?

I'd suggest landscape rectangles for preference, whether page is landscape or portrait.

[jdaw1]

To be implemented at the next opportunity.

Done.

Code: Select all

/CDSizeScore  % http://www.ThePortForum.com/viewtopic.php?t=175&start=205
	CDHeightOneCork CDWidthOneCork mul
	CorkDisplayMinWidth 0 gt  CorkDisplayMinHeight 0 gt  and
	{
		CorkDisplayMinWidth CDHeightOneCork mul  CorkDisplayMinHeight CDWidthOneCork mul  add  dup 0 gt {div} {pop pop -1} ifelse
	} if  % positive minima
def  % /CDSizeScore

[PhilW]

@Julian - ty for making the placemat postscript freely available online; used to great effect last night for non-TPF session.

Also discovered another possible bug, as follows:
- first define all the /Belowtitles as ( ) (i.e. a brackets with two spaces between; defining one member of the array this way and all others as () is also sufficient)
- then set /DecanterLabelsNumCopies to 1
- then convert to pdf (using ps2pdf.com)
- this causes the distiller to crash due to overflow (probably something to do with assessing font size based on only space characters?).

The reason this occurred was that I previously had values in all the /Belowtitles fields, all with start and end spaces, such as "( Magnum )" and simply removed all the words, but not the additional start/end spaces.

You might perfectly validly say "don't set values in the /Belowtitles aarray to a pair brackets with two spaces between"; Alternatively, setting a minimum value for BelowtitleFontSizes or similar might be worthwhile to prevent the crash.

[jdaw1]

You might perfectly validly say "don't set values !"

I would not say any such thing. It should work.

It was a minor problem. In outputting to the log, a number was being cvsed into a string that was one character too small. Fixed.

Thank you for the clear bug report. Please re-test.

[PhilW]

Thank you for the clear bug report. Please re-test.

Fix verified.

[jdaw1]

New version. The code did some checks for errors. Over time this had grown into a disorganised and incomplete part of the code. Now improved.

[jdaw1]

I acknowledge the bug apparent on page 139 (pre-pour, CáF80 aus Portugal) of the draft of the placemats for the 1980 Horizontal in Leverkusen. Page 142 (pre-pour, SW) has a similar problem.

Expect repair within a few weeks.

[jdaw1]

The joy of a post-whisky shower: the problem was a factor of two, and I realised just where. Fixed.

[jdaw1]

After the GC + SW + QH triple vertical on Thu 17 Nov 2011, DRT asked that there be extra paper between tasters’ sets. He then suggested that this could be my placename page. So JDAW placename, JDAW glasses, JDAW TNs, then the next person’s same.

My thinking is as follows.

• I could add an extra page, marked with my name, with no other function. The wastage rankles.

• Or it could be the placename, as DRT suggested. But RAYC prints the placenames to card, so having them non-consecutive would complicate his printing.

• Or alternate sets (alternate people, so to speak) could be rotated by 180°. But would that be sufficiently different for the task at hand?

What do others think?

[jdaw1]

For the GC + SW + QH triple vertical on Thu 17 Nov 2011, RAYC made several similar versions of the placemats, and then overlapped the printouts to simulate the following A3 arrangement.

Of course this overlapping of multiple copies is unacceptable.

Currently the array parameter PermittedPackingStyles may contain any of (and must contain at least one of) /PseudoHexagonal, /SquareGrid, /RectangularDislocation, /RectangularDislocationV, /TwoRowsOrTwoColumns, /GaiaElegant, /Gaia, or /Irregular or one of its variants. None of these do quite what RAYC required.

The proposal is to allow PermittedPackingStyles to contain an array, at least as long as the number of glasses on the page. That array would contain sub-arrays of locations, [ x y ]. My code would then choose the radius and separately scale the x and y directions such that things fit as snugly as possible, obviously subject to the other upper bounds on the radius. That gives the technical user a lot of control over the rare complicated cases, whilst the usual name parameters still cope with the vast majority of arrangements that could be wanted.

In the particular case of the GC+SW+QH tasting, the element of PermittedPackingStyles could have been [ [0 2] [2 2] [4 2] [6 2] [0 1] [3 1] [6 1] [0 0] [3 0] [6 0] ]. Observe that this example assumes that positive y points north. This echoes the usual PostScript convention; but conflicts with the usual page arrangements in which glasses with a small WithinPage are at the top.

Thoughts? Comments? Views on which direction positive y should be? Bottle of Taylor 1977?

(This post the last on this page. Please could the first to reply to it quote it, except this line.)