FontSample.py -- Minor amendments

FontSample.py doesn't work real well as shipped. This diff looks at A4 paper only. Letter may require another amendment.

159c159
< tocstyle.charsInRow = 75
---
> tocstyle.charsInRow = 79
223,224c223,224
<         paper.lmargin = 50
<         paper.rmargin = 50
---
>         paper.lmargin = 30
>         paper.rmargin = 30
313c313
<     [16, 15, fontName + '\n', 23, "l"],
---
>     [16, 15, fontName + '\n', 28, "l"],
352c352
<     header = scribus.createText(paper.leftSide, yPos, paper.textwidth, 35)
---
>     header = scribus.createText(paper.leftSide, yPos, paper.textwidth, 40)

Hi, This should have been filed as bug on bugs.scribus.net. I have sent this on to sjc for review.

Thanks, --mrdocs 00:01, 21 Aug 2005 (CEST)

It is not clear what version of the script this patch is intended for. Does it take into account the effect of the "Extra offset for binding" selector?

If it does not then this may also have to be altered for this to work correctly because I originally reduced the value to 75 as a quick fix for the addition of that facility.--Sjc 02:34, 21 Aug 2005 (CEST)

I am sorry, all I wanted was something that worked for me and so it may have been useful for others. The script version is the same as in the CVS and has been there for a long time. What it did before amendment was to show the X in the text frames because of overflow, forcing you to manually adjust the presentation to see what font it was and all the characters....Owen

No worries :)

But issues like this really should go to the bug tracker.. even minor ones. Thanks.--mrdocs 15:54, 22 Aug 2005 (CEST)

On reflection, although I recall the original value being 79 I remember preferring a slightly narrower width after looking at an old 19th century book. I cannot remember now if it was this or the "Extra offset for binding" feature that resulted in the value ending up being reduced.

There is no real reason why both values could not be made available. The next version (0.8) has a configuration dialog where these sort of options could be added. --Sjc 21:31, 2 Oct 2005 (CEST)