On 08/10/2010 05:16 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
While trying to fix #6786 (http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/6786), I
found out
that the naming of Flex insets is very weird.
I think I looked at this once before and also found it weird.
So I know I am coming after the battle here, but I wonder what is the
need of
adding (or not) the Custom: prefix to the inset name. The inset name
is going to be
shown in the interface, and having this prefix in menus is rather ugly
IMO.
If I remember correctly, I think there was a time when the Custom and
CharStyle prefixes were used to decide where things went on the menu.
But it isn't used for that now.
But in fact, we can chose _not_ to have it, and everything will work
in the
same way. The orthodox way of doing it would have been to have
something like
InsetLayout Flex:Noun
LyxType charstyle
...
Then this gets written in the lyx file as
\begin_inset Flex Noun
...
Question: Why even bother with the "Flex:" prefix? We don't have a
default "InsetLayout Flex" and I don't see any reason to have one. Also....
I think that we should before 2.0 (but my time for doing it is going
to be
scarce unfortunately) change our layouts and our LyX format to enforce
these rules. This will IMO make the menus look better and make sure that
everything is coherent. In the future, it will help us to have a
single notion
of name and type for insets, which can be used for InsetLayout, but also
for naming inset dialogs and for the LyX file format. This will be
helpful
IMO if we ever switch to xml.
The plan would be:
* layout2layout: for all insets layouts which name is not in the
hardcoded list
(Note, Branch...), including Custom:, CharStyle:, and Element:,
remove the existing prefix
and replace it with Flex:
* lyx2lyx: do the same, but do not add Flex: :)
If we do different things in these two places, then we have to change
something in the C++ code, too. In particular, we'll have to add the
"Flex" back onto the layout name when we create the InsetFlex.
Otherwise, we get an InsetFlex whose name is "Noun", and it can't its
layout, "Flex:Noun". There are various options, but this seems
dangerous. If someone did want to create some "X:Y" insets, then how to
handle those? Etc. So I'd just forget about "Flex:", and I don't think
this would actually take much work. I.e., I could do it.
rh
