[rfc-i] Should figures float?

julian.reschke at gmx.de (Julian Reschke) Fri, 11 July 2014 07:02 UTC

From: "julian.reschke at gmx.de"
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:02:34 +0200
Subject: [rfc-i] Should figures float?
In-Reply-To: <CABSMSPVOSHttztmJ4NOJ6v4VZuYJhwjADjFttA+6Z211dOuftw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <53BF3DEE.2030503@gmail.com> <53BF82AD.8060602@gmx.de> <CABSMSPVOSHttztmJ4NOJ6v4VZuYJhwjADjFttA+6Z211dOuftw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53BF8C0A.90005@gmx.de>

On 2014-07-11 08:53, Riccardo Bernardini wrote:
> ...
> My opinion in brief: definitively a +1 for having figures (and tables,
> and [possibly] algorithms, and...) floating for paginated formats: the
> result looks usually order of magnitude better than the result with
> fixed position.   Should I take a decision, I would go for floating by
> default + possibility of some adjustment via optional attributes (yes,
> it is the LaTeX model... :-).

We can't change the default for existing markup.

> My personal experience  (> 20 years long) in writing scientific paper
> is that in the 99% of the cases the automatic placement algorithm
> makes a very good work, in the remaining 1% you may need some hand
> tweaking (done at the very last moment, in our case before finalizing
> the RFC).
>
> I'm not sure if floating would be useful in non-paginated format.  I

It wouldn't be useful at all (at least in the case for vertical floats).

> would keep it, nevertheless, unless it turns out too much difficult to
> implement.

There's nothing to "keep", as this feature doesn't exist yet :-).

Best regards, Julian