Le 31/08/2015 13:23, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Le 28/08/2015 19:25, Guillaume Munch a écrit :
First, thank you, it sure looks better than hand-drawn lines. Have you
considered the following characters:
⮐ U+2B90 RETURN LEFT
⮑ U+2B91 RETURN RIGHT
⮒ U+2B92 NEWLINE LEFT
⮓ U+2B93 NEWLINE RIGHT
These have been introduced in Unicode 7.0 (June 2014). I cannot use them
on my local Ubuntu 12.04. I do not know what is a good unicode version
to support, say, windows xp (do we still support that?).
which seem to be made for this purpose exactly? It should be easy to
supply a fallback font if the user do not have them, so that it looks
better than U+2936 in all cases.
How does one do with Qt to do this fallback thing? We could definitely
try all the symbols in some predefined order.
From what I have seen, you can only switch the font, not the code
point. One can supply a font with the symbols and register it with Qt
for use in case they are missing. I expect that it's compatible with
older systems since the OS does not need to know the name of a character
to display it.
For the current purpose I find it overkill, but maybe supplying a
fallback font will get more and more useful if we start generalizing
unicode usage in LyX?
Also, would it make sense to force the character to be for example in
roman upright medium, or let it be sabs/bold/italics like the rest of
the text?
I see that you haven't got the opinion of others yet. I'm with the former.
Also, I do not find the reversed the arrow intuitive for "break but keep
justified".
Why exactly? To me the horizontal part of the arrow tells in which
direction the line will be "pushed".
I understood your motivation for using this symbol but did not find it
intuitive. One could argue that this is a matter of taste, which is why
it's interesting to gather opinions.
I agree that justifying the last line is more intuitive than
the previous "cryptic" symbol (return + rightarrow). It remains to
decide what to do in the case where "on-screen justification" is
disabled. In that case, other than the old return+rightarrow, one could
"justify" only the return character, that is to say aligning it to the
right.
Yes. I am not sure how intuitive it would be. Not more than the
'reversed newline' IMO.
I won't argue. I find return + rightarrow more intuitive than the
inverted symbol. But it would help to know the opinion of others.
Anyway, I have not written this particular patch yet, and I do not
know when I will have time to do so. We'll discuss it again then.
In the meanwhile, we could have either right-aligned return as suggested
above, or the previous return+rightarrow symbol, either of which would
need to be implemented anyway for when on-screen justification is
disabled (if you agree that the reversed symbol is not good).
Let's wait for input from other people on this last question.
Yes, my hope was to stimulate the discussion.
Guillaume
