From Bill Simpson <wsimpson@uwinnipeg.ca>  Wed Jun  3 20:32:37 1998
From: Bill Simpson <wsimpson@uwinnipeg.ca> (Bill Simpson)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 14:32:37 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: lty
In-Reply-To: <x2g1hms38b.fsf@blueberry.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.980603142647.5513A-100000@io.uwinnipeg.ca>

> > Sorry, my previous message said using lty="2" made line disappear.  Wrong.
> > 
> > What happens is that
> > "2" is dots
> > "3" is dashes
> > 
> > BUT docs say
> > "2" is dashes
> > "3" is dots
> > 
> > So there is an error in the docs.
> 
> Nope:
> 	lty=1 solid
> 	lty=2 dashed
> 	lty=3 dotted
> 	lty=4 dotdashed
> 	lty="1" pattern: 1 "dot" on, 1 "dot" off
> 	lty="2" pattern: 2 "dots" on, 2 "dots" off
> 	lty="3" pattern: 3 "dots" on, 3 "dots" off
> 	lty="32" pattern: 3 "dots" on, 2 "dots" off
> 	lty="124" pattern: 1 on, 2 off, 4 on, 1 off, 2 on, 4 off, 
> 	...and so forth...

Peter, to me (and this is English language) "dot" is shorter than "dash"!
.-.--
dot dash dot dash dash.

So "dot" SHOULD be label for lty="2" pattern: 2 "dots" on, 2 "dots" off
And "dash" SHOULD be label for lty="3" pattern: 3 "dots" on, 3 "dots" off.
Since dot is shorter than dash.

> 
> You can see this clearly if you start with par(lwd=5). As far as I can
> see without actually digging into the source,
This is answer to previous posting on lwd.  So it is there, just not
documented. Thanks.

> The dot-dash pattern on X11 looks wrong, though. I think it should
> have been "1343", i.e. same pattern, reverse colors.
My comments above were based on viewing saved plot with ghostview and
actually printing it with ghostscript.

Bill

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._


lty
Bill Simpson