Jim & all,

Please see:

http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Tiling_Pattern

for the proposed update.

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message

On 9/23/2016 1:50 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> Jim & all,
>
> Please see:
>
> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Tiling_Pattern
>
> for the proposed update.
>
> Bill P.

not so lucky with this one ... i can't seem to get wiki to render this 
properly. works fine as standalone html page in Chrome, IE, and FF. will 
have to put this one on hold until i can find out whats happening ... i 
/really/ feel this is a wiki-ism ... stay tuned

here's a screenshot of what i going for:

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'thinslines.png' (26 KB)

Preview of image 'thinslines.png'

On 09/24/2016 10:09 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 9/23/2016 1:50 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>> Jim & all,
>>
>> Please see:
>>
>> http://wiki.povray.org/content/Reference_Talk:Tiling_Pattern
>>
>> for the proposed update.
>>
>> Bill P.
>
> not so lucky with this one ... i can't seem to get wiki to render this
> properly. works fine as standalone html page in Chrome, IE, and FF. will
> have to put this one on hold until i can find out whats happening ... i
> /really/ feel this is a wiki-ism ... stay tuned
>
> here's a screenshot of what i going for:
>
OK. Strange. I see the table OK in FF on the wiki talk page.

One thing I notice looking at the html again is I set the border not 
very thick at: border="2px solid black". Probably something like 5px 
would be better, but this might not be related at all to what you see.

Please let me know if I can help.

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message

On 9/24/2016 1:37 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> OK. Strange. I see the table OK in FF on the wiki talk page.
>
> One thing I notice looking at the html again is I set the border not
> very thick at: border="2px solid black". Probably something like 5px
> would be better, but this might not be related at all to what you see.

the table as it appears is a bit clunky and i was going for something a 
bit sleeker looking ... did you notice that border="2px solid black" is 
having difficulty? try changing black to red or solid to dashed and see 
what i mean. btw: going from 2px to 5px works tho. i even tried using 
inline style="yada-yada" and no joy either. that is what i meant by 
wiki-ism ... somethings work some don't. since inline style is not 
considered best practice these days i created the following style:


.lined {
   margin: auto;
   background-color: transparent;
   text-align: center;
   border-bottom: 1px solid #efefef;
   border-collapse: collapse;
}

the wiki doesn't render faint grey lines that border-bottom: 1px solid 
#efefef; specifies but works great as standalone html page ... again 
with the wiki-ism

Post a reply to this message

On 09/25/2016 08:21 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 9/24/2016 1:37 PM, William F Pokorny wrote:
>> OK. Strange. I see the table OK in FF on the wiki talk page.
>>
>> One thing I notice looking at the html again is I set the border not
>> very thick at: border="2px solid black". Probably something like 5px
>> would be better, but this might not be related at all to what you see.
>
> the table as it appears is a bit clunky and i was going for something a
> bit sleeker looking ... did you notice that border="2px solid black" is
> having difficulty? try changing black to red or solid to dashed and see
> what i mean. btw: going from 2px to 5px works tho. i even tried using
> inline style="yada-yada" and no joy either. that is what i meant by
> wiki-ism ... somethings work some don't. since inline style is not
> considered best practice these days i created the following style:
>
>
> .lined {
>   margin: auto;
>   background-color: transparent;
>   text-align: center;
>   border-bottom: 1px solid #efefef;
>   border-collapse: collapse;
> }
>
> the wiki doesn't render faint grey lines that border-bottom: 1px solid
> #efefef; specifies but works great as standalone html page ... again
> with the wiki-ism

OK. I changed to a border of 5 and dropped the border color 
specification as it seemed to be ignored in the wiki as you suggested.

I'm not though seeing anything like the image you posted. The table now 
and prior looked alright to me. I've tested the current talk page in IE, 
Edge, Chrome, Firefox and Silk. All look OK to me.

I have noticed for other tables in our wiki we have gone without borders 
- the pavement pattern for example. Doing that here too is an option.

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message

On 9/25/2016 11:10 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> I have noticed for other tables in our wiki we have gone without borders
> - the pavement pattern for example. Doing that here too is an option.

well ... maybe toooo i'm hung up on having wiki presentation looking as 
close as possible to the distribution, so how's this sound as an 
alternate proposal?

how about modifying the file ~scenes/textures/pattern/tiling.pov that's 
already in the distribution! i see #declare TilingPattern = Value; so 
just test that variable in a switch/case block then group like scaling 
factors together by the case test (there are several) and assign scaling 
to a new variable.

Post a reply to this message

On 9/25/2016 1:48 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> how about modifying the file ~scenes/textures/pattern/tiling.pov

attached is modified file ... all you have to do is plugin TilingPattern 
and TileTypes respectively from the Tiling Pattern image in the docs. i 
plugged in a few values and i agree with what i see others ... wellll 
maybe not

give it a whirl and see if the results are what you intended

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'tiling371.pov.txt' (4 KB)

On 9/25/2016 4:23 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> attached is modified file ...

that i'll teach me to do it from memory ... attached is corrected 
version .... #case (1) | #case (2) NOT #case (1|2)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'tiling371.pov.txt' (4 KB)

Am 25.09.2016 um 22:37 schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> On 9/25/2016 4:23 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> attached is modified file ...
> 
> that i'll teach me to do it from memory ... attached is corrected
> version .... #case (1) | #case (2) NOT #case (1|2)

Actually it should be `#case (1) #case (2)`. Nothing in between. If you use

    #case (1)
      ANYTHING
    #case (2)
      WHATEVER
    #break

you'll effectively get `ANYTHING WHATEVER` for a value of 1, and
`WHATEVER` for a value of 2.

Post a reply to this message

On 9/25/2016 6:03 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.09.2016 um 22:37 schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>> On 9/25/2016 4:23 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> attached is modified file ...
>>
>> that i'll teach me to do it from memory ... attached is corrected
>> version .... #case (1) | #case (2) NOT #case (1|2)
>
> Actually it should be `#case (1) #case (2)`. Nothing in between. If you use
>
>     #case (1)
>       ANYTHING
>     #case (2)
>       WHATEVER
>     #break
>
> you'll effectively get `ANYTHING WHATEVER` for a value of 1, and
> `WHATEVER` for a value of 2.

doh ... tested with 2nd case and it passed. when i changed to 1st case 
it belched on |

attached is repaired version

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'tiling371.pov.txt' (4 KB)