Projectile's Physical System Desc. Figure Concerns

[balacij]

Looking at Projectile's PSD figure, I had some notes/concerns:

Notes:

1. The text annotations (Projectile, Launcher, and Target) might be best off in a legend with coloured nodes replacing the existing black nodes.
2. $\mathbf{p}$ does not appear in the table of symbols. But $p(t)$ does.
3. We mix notation styles, e.g., $v^i$ (superscript $i$) and $p_{\text{target}}$ (subscribt $\text{target}$).
4. The annotation $p_{\text{target}}$ is a bit poorly placed. It looks like it is the difference between $p_{\text{land}}$ and $\text{Target}$, with $d_{\text{offset}} = |p_\text{target}|$.
5. $x$ and $y$ could be placed a bit better.
6. Is the arrow with $g$ necessary? I don't know if that's really a part of the physical system description. If it is, then we need to add a $PS4$ element to the PSD that mentions it.

[smiths]

These are good points @balacij. Maybe a bit picky, but picky is good! The problem is that the figures are hand-drawn and not generated. If the notation changes in the document, the author needs to manually fix the figure.

I like $g$ in the figure, to emphasize that it is pointing down. The figure could be referenced by the assumption that $g$ is down (yAxisGravity). The figure's purpose doesn't have to be limited to the physical system description.

[JacquesCarette]

I don't think it would be that hard to generate TikZ for that diagram, which would take care of inconsistencies. How to generate SVG (for the HTML) is less clear to me.