Larger title and smaller headings about lni HOT 16 CLOSED

Thank you for the comparison. Let me explain, what I did (or at least what I think I did)

I redefined \small to \fontsize{9}{10} and \large to {14}{17}. I then replaced all explicit calls of \fontsize by a concrete size macro.

I am aware that some \small calls had been used before and therefore these calls now result in 1pt less baselineskip. However, this does not explain all changes in my opinion.

The same is valid for the caption skip, where I replaced explicit settings by the caption's setup.

I guess I have to check once more, whether we can get this right.

from lni.

Well, I found a reason at least for the title font. I used \@xivpt which is actually not 14pt, but 14.4pt.

from lni.

@koppor Would you like to check again using the most recent developer version?

from lni.

Two issues fixed, three remain:

from lni.

Is it because of some of the following changes?

6317278#diff-1fbc20f5d285bbdef700c0c39ab085c6R219

from lni.

Yes, I found at least one remaining bug regarding the running heading.

from lni.

Found another one regaring the caption. Same thing. Was \small before and now, but \small was changed from {9}{11} to {9}{10} resulting in a smaller line spacing.

Sorry.

from lni.

Maybe you want to test again. I am sure about the table line, the rest should be fixed.

from lni.

Title font size still change - the smaller one is the new one. Looks uglier, I would say?!

The spacings are moved somehow. I lean towards saying that the old spacing looks better, because of slight more distance between the table lines.

from lni.

I am a bit puzzled. Originally the title was set using \fontsize{14}{17}\selectfont. I changed that to \Large which was wrong, because that gives \fontsize{14.4}{17}\selectfont by default.
Therefore I added \renewcommand\Large{\@setfontsize\Large{14}{17}} to the class file.

So comparing version dc22fb4a6f9d8ec1feb5150ca04e0c220091cbc6 with the current development version should give the same result.

Is it the same font?

After all I wanted to make it more elegant, but apparently made it worse ...

from lni.

Heading: Yeah, you are right. Here the video from v1.3 to 6317278 to current master (22e9273):

The issue is that the line spacing in the heading changed from v1.3 to 6317278 . So, let's keep the title as is, but fix the spacing in the heading? Alternatively, I try to include the spacing adjustments in the proceedings template.

The table spacing still changes:

OK, the spacing is better because of more space for authors :)

from lni.

Thank you for the comparisons. I don't understand why \oldsmall which is the original \small in the current master and \small (the original) in v1.3 do end up in different results.

It would be easiest to go back to the explicit font size settings if that problem persists. I will do that within the next days.

from lni.

I think, we can keep the current settings. Less spacing in tables leaves the authors more space in the paper.

Regarding the heading space, I would also opt for leaving it as is, because the difference are very minimal. We can work on it if some proceedings authors start to wonder about it.

from lni.

Well, it is only some very small modification to get back to the old settings (and the old design).

Should we do that? As you said, it is only a very small difference, so we should go for the old solution.

from lni.

Sorry, I saw your mail regarding this matter too late ... I leave it up to you. So if you think we should go with the new settings, then we'll do.

from lni.

In the .docx, it is also a small spacing:

So, I think, we should keep the current solution.

from lni.