Re: {Spam?} CVS-1.239; Misalignment of footnote markers

David Kastrup wrote:
> Now the ascent of the superscript would be more than 100 if we really
> had a tight bounding box.  For this reason, the PostScript code
> adjusts the bounding box to always include the baseline, and the same
> calculation is done within preview.el.
> 
> But not in dvipng.

Umm, sorry, but this I simply didn't know.

> I propose to fix this in the following way: I'll change the code in
> preview.sty to always include the baseline, but not within PostScript,
> but rather within TeX.  That means that dvipng would get a modified
> tightpage \special that always includes the baseline.  That way
> previous versions of dvipng would work fine, but the cost would be
> that the tightpage option would no longer produce a tight page around
> things like superscripts.  Since it never did so previously except
> when using dvipng, I don't think people will tend to complain.  And I
> don't think that anybody except dvipng and preview-latex relies on
> parsing the PostScript tightpage special itself.
> 
> Everybody ok with that?

Yep.
/JÅ