On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 01:11:34PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 07:20:11AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 09:11:26PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 08:47:29PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 06:02:02PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > n times for every string you want to 'branchify', i.e., n times for > > > > > > every > > > > > > case in a 'cases' statement, n times the number of branchifyable > > > > > > strings > > > > > > in an XFig graphic, etc., where n is the number of branches. > > > > > > Remember > > > > > > this is ERT-like. It's not LyX inserting these command names. > > > > > > > > > > I math, it should be a MathBranch inset. > > > > > > > > Hmmm, that's an interesting idea. How would that work in practice? > > > > > > > > Wouldn't it be better to strive for allowing true text insets embedded > > > > in math? (Surely not simple.) > > > > > > The problem is reading from an external file (*.lyx). The rest more or > > > less works. > > > > How hard would that be to fix? > > Very hard. That's why we don't have real text-in-math since 1.3 when it > became possible in theory. It will be easier when we have a structured > file format (i.e. XML), but somehow XML seemingly got stuck... > > Andre'
But didn't we have some parts of it working? What happened to that? Why would we not just commit what we have? Tabular is already XML based and I hear no complaints about that. - Martin
