> > Yes, I think so to. If you read the ExternalTemplate.lyx file, you will
> > notice that this is mentioned as a feature to implement for a volunteer.
>
> I've added more options to the external inset: the ability to resize/rotate
> the result (the resize buttons doesn't work yet).
>
> I also changed the file format for storing InsetExternal: I use the same
> file format of InsetFig.
I'm sorry, but I think we have misunderstood each other.
I did not mean that we should have resize/rotate
buttons literately. I meant that we should have
a way of specifying these things.
The problem with having them literally, is that the external
inset is more general than just for graphics.
For instance, it does not make sense to specify size or
rotation for the date template.
Therefore, I would much rather prefer to have generic
parameter fields for both the product commands, and
the update commands.
In conclusion, this patch is moving in the wrong direction, IMO,
but it's entirely my fault, because I wasn't clear enough the first time.
Having said that, I am willing to discuss the issue. Obviously,
most of the external insets *will* be using a picture of some
kind, and therefore, it might be justified to have these specialized
controls in there -- even if some templates won't use it.
What do others think? Is it a good idea to have resizing and
rotating available for all external insets, when maybe 90% will
be able to use one or both options?
Maybe it would be best to provide a bool in the template definition for
each control, to allow the template to dictate whether the controls make
sense?
I think that might be the way to go, because it *is* nicer to specify
size and rotating directly rahter than with some strange
parameters...
So I think I've convinced myself that the patch is moving in the
right direction after all. It just needs some spit and polish, and
I'd accept it. In particular, if the controls are optional
from the point of view of the template, the patch is excellent.
Greets,
Asger
