R devel - Jul 2006 - Unexpected difference in Bounding Box of PDF graphics between (PR#9072)

huber at ebi.ac.uk wrote:
> Full_Name: Wolfgang Huber
> Version: R version 2.4.0 Under development (unstable) (2006-07-09 r38523)
> OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu     
> Submission from: (NULL) (62.253.128.15)
> 
> 
> There appears to be unintentional behaviour in the size of the bounding box
for
> PDF graphics produced with the current R2.4, compared to 2.3.1. I posted
two PDF
> files, both produced with the same R script below, but different versions
of R:
> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/~huber/pub
> 
> The code is here:
> 
> 
> pdf(file=sprintf("test-%s.pdf", version$"svn rev"),
width=4, height=4)
> par(mai=par("mai")[rep(1:2,2)])
> x = seq(0, 10*pi, length=3000)
> plot(x*cbind(sin(x),cos(x)), type="l", col="mistyrose",
lwd=3)
> 
> sink(textConnection("s", "w"))
> options(width=40)
> print(sessionInfo(), width=30)
> sink()
> 
> text(-30, 30-4*seq(along=s), s, adj=c(0,0.5), cex=0.7) 
> dev.off()
> 
> 
> 
> and one of the differences between the resulting PDF files is:
> test-38323.pdf: /MediaBox [0 0 288 288]
> test-38523.pdf: /MediaBox [0 0 595 841]
> 
> The former corresponds to 4x4 inches, the latter to 21cm x 29.67cm.
[0 0 595 842] is A4 size. Probably a default taken from something.

Please take great care not to start a new bug report when commenting on an 
old one, as you have done here.  It really makes a mess of the records on 
the repository.  (Ensure that the PR# item appears on the first line.)

We do suggest quite strongly that people do not send reports on 
R-devel to R-bugs, as it is often `under development' as here.  If you 
want to comment on R-devel, do make sure you are using the 
up-to-the-minute version, and use the R-devel list.


On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk wrote:
> huber at ebi.ac.uk wrote:
>> Full_Name: Wolfgang Huber
>> Version: R version 2.4.0 Under development (unstable) (2006-07-09
r38523)
>> OS: i686-pc-linux-gnu
>> Submission from: (NULL) (62.253.128.15)
>>
>>
>> There appears to be unintentional behaviour in the size of the bounding
box for
>> PDF graphics produced with the current R2.4, compared to 2.3.1. I
posted two PDF
>> files, both produced with the same R script below, but different
versions of R:
>> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/~huber/pub
>>
>> The code is here:
>>
>>
>> pdf(file=sprintf("test-%s.pdf", version$"svn rev"),
width=4, height=4)
>> par(mai=par("mai")[rep(1:2,2)])
>> x = seq(0, 10*pi, length=3000)
>> plot(x*cbind(sin(x),cos(x)), type="l",
col="mistyrose", lwd=3)
>>
>> sink(textConnection("s", "w"))
>> options(width=40)
>> print(sessionInfo(), width=30)
>> sink()
>>
>> text(-30, 30-4*seq(along=s), s, adj=c(0,0.5), cex=0.7)
>> dev.off()
>>
>>
>>
>> and one of the differences between the resulting PDF files is:
>> test-38323.pdf: /MediaBox [0 0 288 288]
>> test-38523.pdf: /MediaBox [0 0 595 841]
>>
>> The former corresponds to 4x4 inches, the latter to 21cm x 29.67cm.
>
> [0 0 595 842] is A4 size. Probably a default taken from something.
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
>
-- 
Brian D. Ripley,                  ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics,  http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford,             Tel:  +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road,                     +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK                Fax:  +44 1865 272595