Le 01/01/2017 à 18:29, Guenter Milde a écrit :
On 2016-12-31, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Is there a use case for the document specific setting?
(I.e. is there someone in need for one keybinding inserting "dynamic"
quote insets in one document but "static" quote insets in another
document?)
Yes. I prefer to use static quotes in some documents, dynamic in the
other.
There is even the need for dynamic and static quotes within the same
document. If I need different quote styles within one document (e.g.,
English style within English quotations within a German document), I
need to use static quotes. Nevertheless I could still need to use a
dynamic type for the main quotes. The latter lets me switch from
inverted commas to guillemets (or vice versa) if my publisher requests
this.
Yes, this is why we need static quotes (or just a convenient way to insert
Unicode quote characters) besides the "dynamic" quotes.
But in any case the "foreign" quotes require either modifying the
once-inserted quote (via context menu) or insertion via LFUN with arguments
or the Insert>Character>... menu.
This would be independent of the value of an eventual (and in my view not
necessary) document setting.
I find too that the above does not make the case for a new document
setting that changes the default behaviour of a LFUN.
Also note that an LFUN change is all but user friendly. This would hide
the dynamic quotes from most users.
I propose to change the pre-set keybinding for " from "quote-insert" to
"quote-insert * * dynamic".
What about having quote-insert input dynamic quotes by default except in
foreign language?
Or, have the dynamic quote as default, but have it behave like a foreign
code's default quote in foreign language. This default is not
configurable, but it is the same with the static quote.
This would expose the new quote inset variant to users, especially as it is
now blue.
If it is going to be the default then please do not have it in blue.
