Nikos Chantziaras composed on 2014-11-08 18:45 (UTC+0200):
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> Width: 51
>> Height: 29
>> If those are correct, that's somewhere around a 55" screen, which at
>> 1920x1080 is a pixel density under 40.
...
> No, those are centimeters, not inches. These screen dimensions correctly
> describe my 23" monitor:
You omitted quoting what followed
>> OTOH, earlier in that output is reported "MMSize: QSize(510, 290)", which is
>> a 23 inch 96 DPI screen.
which already explained the difference to any who notice the cm/mm
connection, which I didn't do. The bigger puzzle is why Xorg logs contain a
variety of units instead of picking just one and sticking to it.
> sqrt(51^2 + 29^2)
> That's a diagonal of 58cm, which is 23",
If actually 23.00", then it's 58.42cm. Display vendors often advertize a size
"class" rather than a true diagonal dimension.
> and that is my monitor's size.
> And, as it happens, that means a pixel density of 96.
More accurately, 23" is 95.778 DPI, as I figured out years ago:
http://fm.no-ip.com/PC/displays.html
##.# cm and ###. mm are both too granular for configuring X in all cases of
attempts via DisplaySize in xorg.conf* or --dpi in xrandr to force a desired
DE DPI as the DM starts instead of leaving the task to the DE. More often
than not they produce the desired result, but frequently they don't quite get
it right in both directions, and the only way I've found that always works is
the xrandr --fbmm method.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
