On 2016/07/26 08:22:16 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:49:16PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> >From aa7969fe4675ab8ee3c7da0470b04f90574b641c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:31:20 +0900
>> Subject: [PATCH] Tweak width of epigraph for two-column layout
>>
>> The default of \epigraphwidth is .5\textwidth.
>> It is too wide for two-column layout.
>> This commit modifies it to .65\columnwidth for two-column
>> layout.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I am not so sure about this. For example, see Chapter 3's epigraph,
> which ends up with a separate line for the last word. Ditto for the
> "Glossary and Bibliography", and Appendix A.
>
> Chapter 16 ends up with a piled-high epigraph, as does Chapter 7.
>
> Of course, the one-column version has similarly compressed epigraphs.
>
> So I am wondering if it might be better to leave the two-column
> epigraph width alone and to expand the single-column epigraph width.
>
> Thoughts?
Okay. To give the same width of epigraph for both one- and two-column
layouts, I'm sending a patch that sets an absolute length for
\epigraphwidth as a reply to this message. This is a bit narrower than
the original two-column one, but it seems OK to me. What do you think?
Thanks, Akira.
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
>> ---
>> perfbook.tex | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/perfbook.tex b/perfbook.tex
>> index 9216485..24fffc6 100644
>> --- a/perfbook.tex
>> +++ b/perfbook.tex
>> @@ -102,6 +102,10 @@
>> \setlength{\evensidemargin}{-4pt}
>> }{}
>>
>> +\IfTwoColumn{
>> +\setlength{\epigraphwidth}{0.65\columnwidth}
>> +}{}
>> +
>> \setcounter{secnumdepth}{3}
>>
>> \frontmatter
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe perfbook" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
