Uwe Stöhr wrote: >> moreover there is no intuitive way how to typeset big initial without >> reading manual where special construct needs to be learned. >> the charstyle path is not clean, but for the basic usage works without any >> need >> to read manual pages. > > What do you expect? No style is self-explanatory. Of course one needs to > read first how it works.
yes, we are from different worlds. i read documentation exceptionaly and most of my know-how of software comes from playing with trial and error. thus the two hints inside the module are quite enough for user like me :) in the same vein i'm not way too much worried about possible latex errors. i have seen zilion of them while working with lyx and when they happen i just fix the problem. thats why i'm not jumping for joy about the style solution. its just nicer ERT and there is no way how to use it except of reading some additional docs. as admitted the charstyle is somewhat hackish and poor support because i dont see way how to solve it correctly with our machinery. it works by chance but it works. the latex problems is solvable by ERT similarly as you are doing in the style solution. if somebody is unable to solve latex issues he will encounter troubles with your solution as well - so there is not much difference. > Our aim should be to > provide features that do work in all cases and don't interfere with other > ones, or even lead to LaTeX errors. its nice to read this just mail after you calmly throw to the dustbin warnings about latex issues (ie missing packages) in the manuals. because we can't care about all cases. >> you are probably right that when you use combinations of >> lettrine with weird stuff around, weird things can happen. like with many >> other >> insets in lyx. > > Sorry, but I cannot agree to this. We worked hard that this doesn't happen > otherwise LyX would be quite useless for real life documents like a thesis > or a business report. Where do you see that problems? If there is one it is > a bug we need to fix. especially the starting pages of papers with wild combination of title, date, subtitile, authors, affiliation, abstract are rich source of latex errs. using space inset is magic, ie. you can not trust that putting 1.mm space in lyx document will have this result in pdf output. you never know what happen unless you latex it. or mixing different latex packages. or using different output routes like postscript vs pdf. or insert weird combination of insets into each other. or using something different than windows when you want to typeset our manuals :)) >>> For compatibility reasons I left your style definition >> >> first of all - as far as compatibility reasons is concerned - your last >> changes >> will cause lyx 2.0.0 not being able to compile some 2.0.x>0 files due to >> missing style > > You mean because I added a style? Yes, LyX 2.0.0 will tell you that a style > is unknown when loading a file made with LyX 2.0.1 that usess my new style. > But this cannot be avoided. Take for example the various layout files we > need to update from time to time when there are new versions. Especially > for example the scientific paper classes we have to add new styles or > rename some LaTeX commands all the time. > >>> but I think we should remove it. >> >> in branch? then some files produced by lyx 2.0.x>1 wont be compilable with >> lyx 2.0.0. > > As I said, better we get rid of the buggy code right now than to wait > longer. Currently the probability that people use the feature is relatively > low because there was no documentation and LyX 2.0.0 is still quites new > (many users I know wait for the 0.1 release before they switch from 1.6 to > 2.0). And we cannot wait until LyX 2.1 because this might be a year and it > is in my opinion not acceptable to provide a style that could lead to LaTeX > errors. *shrug* this is call for Richard. to summary my pov for better review: - i admit that charstyle solution is poor, because it allows only special case of initials. - moreover in specific combination it can lead to latex erros unless you use specific ERT to fix it. - seeing the debate now i admit that its questionable whether it should have been added to lyx at all and let the enh request wontfix instead. however some of these points have been raised months ago and nobody else was against. its my lesson to be more conservative about putting new modules to the tree. - the new added style solution makes it possible to use lettrine package to its depth. its enhacenment to the current state of things. - both solutions can lead to latex errors by missing some ERT, both can be fixed (at least the charstyle counterexample posted). for branch: - new style can be added, lyx 2.0.0 won't process 2.0.1 files. i dont remember what was the previous policies about adding stuff. - i dont see latex the problems described as something detrimental, the more that the second solution calls for the same problems (ie instruct user to use ERT commands). if other devs disagrees with me the solution is to kill the charstyle part. ie 2.0.1 wont process 2.0.0 files. again i dont remember what was the previous policies about removing branch stuff. pavel
