From hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk  Mon Jul 10 13:02:33 2006
From: hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk (Hin-Tak Leung)
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:02:33 +0100
Subject: [Rd] Unexpected difference in Bounding Box of PDF graphics
 between 2.3.1p and 2.4 (PR#9070)
In-Reply-To: <20060709210429.40D63507AF@slim.kubism.ku.dk>
References: <20060709210429.40D63507AF@slim.kubism.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <44B233C9.1060301@cimr.cam.ac.uk>

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.



[Rd] Unexpected difference in Bounding Box of PDF graphics between 2.3.1p and 2.4 (PR#9070)
Hin-Tak Leung