Documentation image source

Chris Johns chrisj at
Thu Oct 8 06:18:28 UTC 2020

On 8/10/20 4:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 08/10/2020 03:01, Chris Johns wrote:
>> I see generated .png and .pdf for some images which I am questioning we need.
>> The user document images I have contributed are only .png files so I am not sure
>> why a PDF is needed for some.
> Images in a vector format is very important for a high quality PDF. Using PNG
> for the PDFs is not really good.

Yes is does help but I am not convinced by the "very important" bit. I looked at
the user manual executable pictures in the PDF at 400% on a quality monitor and
they hold up nicely. All you get to see is the anti-aliasing effects which is

HTML and PDF need to be at the same quality level and I have shown this can be
achieved even with .png files. PDF is not something we should treat as special.
At the moment I cannot read the dot HTML images.

The PDF quality depends on the contents of the PDF fragment. It may not always
be vectors so I am not sure we can assume this. I have seen PDF get abused with
horrible results. It looks like .dot is vector which is fine.

Manual generation is something I would like to avoid and especially if more than
one output file type is being generated. The poor HTML quality of the dot
generated .png files highlights this. Can they please be improved?


More information about the devel mailing list