> >
> >
> > The clipping property was the culprit for the disappearing labels.
> > Please merge the attached changeset with the previous one and you
> > should
> > receive a behavior for the fltk backend which is quite compatible
> > with
> > ML.
> >
> > There are still some smaller issues:
> >
> > 1. When setting a label from a text handle, the fontsize of the text
> > is
> > kept, like also in ML. The problem is that in Octave we have
> > different
> > default sizes for {xyz}label and text. Default fontsize for labels
> > is
> > 12, while default fontsize for text is 10. This can cause a bit of
> > confusion.
>
> Matlab 2010b on MacOS X uses a fontsize of 10 for all text objects.
>
>
> h = findall (0, '-property', 'fontsize');
> type = get (h, 'type');
> fsize = cellfun (@(t) get (0, sprintf ('default%sfontsize', t)), type)
>
>
> fsize =
>
>
> 10
> 10
> 10
> 10
> 10
>
>
> Can you modify the default fontsize for for Octave objects so that
> they are consistent?
>
>
> .. or, If you prefer, I can do that later today.
>
>
> > 2. It seems that there are some inconsistencies with the z position
> > coordinate of label and text objects but I haven't found a test case
> > yet, where this causes problems. Anyway I think one should go
> > through
> > octave and just make sure that all default z coordinates for 2D
> > objects
> > are consistent with ML, just to avoid trouble in the future.
>
>
> It looks to me like the differing z-values are a results of listeners.
> From Matlab, I see ...
>
>
> >> clf
> >> hx = xlabel ('xlabel')
>
>
> hx =
>
>
> 174.0015
>
>
> >> px = get (hx, 'position')
>
>
> px =
>
>
> 0.4988 -0.0658 1.0001
>
>
> >> get (gca, 'zlim')
>
>
> ans =
>
>
> 0 1
>
>
> >> zlim ([0, 2])
> >> px = get (hx, 'position')
>
>
> px =
>
>
> 0.4988 -0.0658 2.0001
>
>
> If I'm not missing something, the list below summarizes the remaining
> issues.
>
>
> (1) Change all default font sizes to one consistent value (10?).
>
The attached patch replaces any appearances of 12 in fontsizes with 10.
It seems a bit too small for my taste but I vote for using the same
value as in ML (10).