summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorKarl Berry <karl@freefriends.org>2010-10-29 00:31:31 +0000
committerKarl Berry <karl@freefriends.org>2010-10-29 00:31:31 +0000
commit6bc1f5497cfb2f56d65c80a4c36ea3bad6dc046c (patch)
treef7751da75030fb1e06653eeb44e579fcee09c65f /Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex
parented0c7c756e441b2d2ba3633da233fc24361ac0d3 (diff)
pgf 2.10 (28oct10)
git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@20236 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751
Diffstat (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex')
-rw-r--r--Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex79
1 files changed, 39 insertions, 40 deletions
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex
index 9d7617d6c38..4436a3ab3fb 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/generic/pgf/text-en/pgfmanual-en-guidelines.tex
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ The guidelines in this section come from different sources. Many of
them are just what I would like to claim is ``common sense,'' some
reflect my personal experience (though, hopefully, not my personal
preferences), some come from books (the bibliography is still missing,
-sorry) on graphic design and typography.
+sorry) on graphic design and typography.
The most influential source are the brilliant books
by Edward Tufte. While I do not agree with everything written in these
books, many of Tufte's arguments are so convincing that I decided to
-repeat them in the following guidelines.
+repeat them in the following guidelines.
The first thing you should ask yourself when someone presents a bunch of
guidelines is: Should I really follow these guidelines? This is an
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ creation of \emph{a first draft} of a half page graphic. Later on, I
expect another one to two hours before the final graphic is finished.
In many publications, even in good journals, the authors and editors
-have obviously invested a lot of time on the text, but seem to
+have obviously invested a lot of time on the text, but seem to
have spend about five minutes to create all of the
graphics. Graphics often seem to have been added as an
``afterthought'' or look like a screen shot of whatever the authors's
@@ -69,14 +69,14 @@ graphics that programs like \textsc{gnuplot} produce by default are of
poor quality.
Creating informative graphics that help the reader and that fit
-together with the main text is a difficult, lengthy process.
+together with the main text is a difficult, lengthy process.
\begin{itemize}
\item
Treat graphics as first-class citizens of your papers. They deserve
as much time and energy as the text does.
Indeed, the creation of graphics might deserve \emph{even more} time
than the writing of the main text since more attention will be paid
- to the graphics and they will be looked at first.
+ to the graphics and they will be looked at first.
\item
Plan as much time for the creation and revision of a graphic as you
would plan for text of the same size.
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ together with the main text is a difficult, lengthy process.
Very simple graphics will require less time, but most likely you do
not want to have ``very simple graphics'' in your paper, anyway;
just as you would not like to have a ``very simple text'' of the
- same size.
+ same size.
\end{itemize}
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ like to report about. The creation of the paper will typically start
with compiling a rough outline. Then, the different sections are
filled with text to create a first draft. This draft is then revised
repeatedly until, often after substantial revision, a final paper
-results. In a good journal paper there is typically not be a single
+results. In a good journal paper there is typically not be a single
sentence that has survived unmodified from the first draft.
Creating a graphics follows the same pattern:
@@ -126,12 +126,12 @@ Creating a graphics follows the same pattern:
Graphics can be placed at different places in a text. Either, they can
be inlined, meaning they are somewhere ``in the middle of the text''
-or they can be placed in standalone ``figures.'' Since printers (the
+or they can be placed in stand-alone ``figures.'' Since printers (the
people) like to have their pages ``filled,'' (both for aesthetic and
-economic reasons) standalone figures may traditionally be placed on
+economic reasons) stand-alone figures may traditionally be placed on
pages in the document far removed from the main text that refers to
them. \LaTeX\ and \TeX\ tend to encourage this ``drifting away'' of
-graphics for technical reasons.
+graphics for technical reasons.
When a graphic is inlined, it will more or less automatically be
linked with the main text in the sense that the labels of the graphic
@@ -139,13 +139,13 @@ will be implicitly explained by the surrounding text. Also, the main
text will typically make it clear what the graphic is about and what
is shown.
-Quite differently, a standalone figure will often be viewed at a time
+Quite differently, a stand-alone figure will often be viewed at a time
when the main text that this graphic belongs to either has not yet
been read or has been read some time ago. For this reason, you should
-follow the following guidelines when creating standalone figures:
+follow the following guidelines when creating stand-alone figures:
\begin{itemize}
\item
- Standalone figures should have a caption than should make them
+ Stand-alone figures should have a caption than should make them
``understandable by themselves.''
For example, suppose a graphic shows an example of the different
@@ -176,9 +176,9 @@ follow the following guidelines when creating standalone figures:
did not end after all.
The argument in favor of abbreviations is that they save space.
-
+
Personally, I am not really convinced by either argument. On the one
- hand, I have not yet seen any hard evidence that abbreviations slow
+ hand, I have not yet seen any hard evidence that abbreviations slow
readers down. On the other hand, abbreviating all ``Figure'' by
``Fig.''\ is most unlikely to save even a single line in most
documents. I avoid abbreviations.
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ follow the following guidelines when creating standalone figures:
Perhaps the most common ``mistake'' people do when creating graphics
(remember that a ``mistake'' in design is always just ``ignorance'')
-is to have a mismatch between the way their graphics look and the way
+is to have a mismatch between the way their graphics look and the way
their text looks.
It is quite common that authors use several different programs for
@@ -228,10 +228,10 @@ following guidelines:
$0.4\,\mathrm{pt}$. However, some journals will not accept graphics
with a normal line width below $0.5\,\mathrm{pt}$.
\item
- When using colors, use a consistent color coding in the text and in
+ When using colors, use a consistent color coding in the text and in
graphics. For example, if red is supposed to alert the reader to
something in the main text, use red also in graphics for important
- parts of the graphic. If blue is used for structural elements like
+ parts of the graphic. If blue is used for structural elements like
headlines and section titles, use blue also for structural elements
of your graphic.
@@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ following guidelines:
main text, also use ``$1/2$'' as labels in graphics, not
``0.5''. A $\pi$ is a ``$\pi$'' and not ``$3.141$''. Finally,
$\mathrm e^{-\mathrm i \pi}$ is ``$\mathrm e^{-\mathrm i \pi}$'',
- not ``$-1$'', let alone ``-1''.
+ not ``$-1$'', let alone ``-1''.
\item
Labels should be legible. They should not only have a reasonably
large size, they also should not be obscured by lines or other
@@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ following guidelines:
necessary, add a (subdued) line from the label to the labeled
object. Try to avoid labels that only reference explanations in
external legends. Reader have to jump back and forth between the
- explanation and the object that is described.
+ explanation and the object that is described.
\item
Consider subduing ``unimportant'' labels using, for example, a gray
color. This will keep the focus on the actual graphic.
@@ -299,14 +299,14 @@ bad plots.
The first question you should ask yourself when creating a plot is,
Are there enough data points to merit a plot? If the answer is ``not
-really,'' use a table.
+really,'' use a table.
A typical situation where a plot is unnecessary is when people present
a few numbers in a bar diagram. Here is a real-life example: At the
end of a seminar a lecturer asked the participants for feedback. Of
the 50 participants, 30 returned the feedback form. According to the
feedback, three participants considered the seminar ``very good,''
-nine considered it ``good,'' ten ``ok,'' eight ``bad,'' and no one thought
+nine considered it ``good,'' ten ``ok,'' eight ``bad,'' and no one thought
that the seminar was ``very bad.''
A simple way of summing up this information is the following table:
@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ were near-unreadable):
\draw (\x,0) node[rotate=90,anchor=east] {\xtext};
\begin{scope}[xshift=\x cm]
-
+
\filldraw[fill=blue!50] (-.3,0,0) rectangle (.3,\height,0);
\filldraw[fill=blue!30] (.3,0,0) -- (.3,0,1) -- (.3,\height,1) -- (.3,\height,0) --cycle;
\filldraw[fill=blue!20] (-.3,\height,0) -- (.3,\height,0) --
@@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ were near-unreadable):
Both the table and the ``plot'' have about the same size. If your first
thought is ``the graphic looks nicer than the table,'' try to answer
the following questions based on the information in the table or in
-the graphic:
+the graphic:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
How many participants where there?
@@ -390,7 +390,7 @@ Here is the list of things that went wrong with the 3D-bar diagram:
\item
The labels at the bottom are rotated, making them hard to read.
- (In the real presentation that I saw, the text was rendered at a very
+ (In the real presentation that I saw, the text was rendered at a very
low resolution with about 10 by 6 pixels per letter with wrong
kerning, making the rotated text almost impossible to read.)
\item
@@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ important for the graphic. The important things is the ``message,''
which is that there are more ``very good'' and ``good'' ratings than
``bad'' and ``very bad.'' However, to convey this message either use a
sentence that says so or use a graphic that conveys this message more
-clearly:
+clearly:
\medskip
\par
@@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ clearly:
\colorlet{neutral}{black!60}
\colorlet{none}{white}
- \node[text centered,text width=3cm]{Ratings given by 50~participants};
+ \node[align=center,text width=3cm]{Ratings given by 50~participants};
\begin{scope}[line width=4mm,rotate=270]
\draw[good] (-123:2cm) arc (-123:-101:2cm);
@@ -443,14 +443,14 @@ clearly:
\divide\mycount by 10\relax
\draw[black!15,thick] (\the\mycount:18mm) -- (\the\mycount:22mm);
}
-
+
\draw (0:2.2cm) node[below] {``ok'': 10 (20\%)};
\draw (165:2.2cm) node[above] {none: 20 (40\%)};
\draw (-111:2.2cm) node[left] {``very good'': 3 (6\%)};
\draw (-68:2.2cm) node[left] {``good'': 9 (18\%)};
\draw (65:2.2cm) node[right] {``bad'': 8 (16\%)};
\draw (93:2.2cm) node[right] {``very bad'': 0 (0\%)};
- \end{scope}
+ \end{scope}
\draw[gray] (0,0) circle (2.2cm) circle (1.8cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
@@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ The above graphic has about the same information density as the table
can directly ``see'' that there are more good or very good ratings
than bad ones. One can also ``see'' that the number of people who gave
no rating at all is not negligible, which is quite common for feedback
-forms.
+forms.
Charts are not always a good idea. Let us look at an example
that I redrew from a pie chart in \emph{Die Zeit}, June 4th, 2005:
@@ -484,7 +484,7 @@ that I redrew from a pie chart in \emph{Die Zeit}, June 4th, 2005:
{\footnotesize Gesamte Netto-Stromerzeugung in Prozent, in
Milliarden Kilowattstunden (Mrd.\ kWh)}
rectangle ([xshift=1mm]right border);
-
+
% The 3D stuff
\pgfdeclarehorizontalshading{zeit}{100bp}
{color(0pt)=(black);
@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ that I redrew from a pie chart in \emph{Die Zeit}, June 4th, 2005:
\draw (0,0) -- (145:1cm);
\draw (0,0) -- (135:1cm);
\draw (0,0) -- (92:1cm);
-
+
\draw(0,0) circle (1cm);
\end{scope}
@@ -554,7 +554,7 @@ that I redrew from a pie chart in \emph{Die Zeit}, June 4th, 2005:
\node[above right] at (Sonstige label) {Sonstige\ \
\footnotesize (16,5 kWh) \hskip1.5cm\
\normalsize\textbf{2,9\%}};
- \end{scope}
+ \end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
This graphic has been redrawn in \tikzname, but the original looks
@@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ are a lot of things that went wrong:
Braunkohle is less than the percentage of Kernenergie}.
\item
The 3D-distortion gets worse for small areas. The area of
- ``Regenerative'' somewhat larger than the area of ``Erdgas.''
+ ``Regenerative'' somewhat larger than the area of ``Erdgas.''
The area of ``Wind'' is slightly smaller than the area of
``Mineral\"olprodukte'' \emph{although the percentage of Wind is
nearly three times larger than the percentage of
@@ -585,13 +585,13 @@ are a lot of things that went wrong:
distortion. The designer(s) of the original graphic have also made
the ``Wind'' slice too small, even taking distortion into
account. (Just compare the size of ``Wind'' to ``Regenerative'' in
- general.)
+ general.)
\item
According to its caption, this chart is supposed to inform us that
coal was the most important energy source in Germany in
2004. Ignoring the strong distortions caused by the superfluous and
misleading 3D-setup, it takes quite a while for this message to get
- across.
+ across.
Coal as an energy source is split up into two slices: one for
``Steinkohle'' and one for ``Braunkohle'' (two different kinds of
@@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ Here are a few recommendations that may help you avoid producing chart junk:
\item
Consider using a table instead of a pie chart.
\item
- Due not apply colors randomly; use them to direct the readers's
+ Do not apply colors randomly; use them to direct the readers's
focus and to group things.
\item
Do not use background patterns, like a crosshatch or diagonal
@@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ from going quickly and evenly from line to line will make the text
harder to read.
Now, pick up your favorite weekly magazine or newspaper and have a
-look at a typical
+look at a typical
page. You will notice that there is quite a lot ``going on'' on the
page. Fonts are used at different sizes and in different arrangements,
the text is organized in narrow columns, typically interleaved with
@@ -719,7 +719,6 @@ Here is a non-exhaustive list of things that can distract readers:
Background images and shadings distract and only seldom add
anything of importance to a graphic.
\item
- Cute little cliparts can easily draw attention away from the
+ Cute little clip arts can easily draw attention away from the
data.
\end{itemize}
-