On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller <sp...@lyx.org> wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 29.12.2017, 22:16 +0900 schrieb Joel Kulesza: > > When within the Frame (e.g., I've typed my last itemize bullet), > > Append new parent environment works as expected. However, if after > > having made additional modifications, there are a couple positions > > that the cursor can exist where Appending a new frame doesn't give > > expected behavior. > > Can you give concrete examples, please? > Please excuse the typos in: https://youtu.be/yZyx_RaFynU Please let me know if there is a better way to provide such examples. I've tried to demonstrate with screen recording what I tried to illustrate with my screenshot previously. There are places I can position the cursor where the Edit menus vary and produce varying behavior. I would expect that anywhere between "Frame" and the horizontal separator to have the ability to pre/append a Frame and to have it be created properly. Please use the MWE attached to further explore the variation in the edit menu entries based on cursor position and eventual action outcome: whether a self-contained frame is inserted, or not. Part of what I'm trying to communicate is how folks coming to Beamer from something like PowerPoint may perceive things. The subtleties of frame environments, their contents (inner/outer), etc. shouldn't necessarily be required knowledge. Instead, it seems much more intuitive to me to have the ability to anywhere prepend or append a frame relative to the cursor position and have the frame appear properly. Thus, I would expect that anywhere I can have the cursor, my two Edit (or preferred: Insert) menu entries are prepend and append frame and that the empty frame will be created where and as requested. > In some positions, prepending isn't available; however, it is > > reasonable to want to insert a Frame before the one associated with > > the cursor position. > > It's only available in the respective layout (i.e., the layout the > cursor is in must be "Frame"). That's by design. I could add "Prepend > outer", but that would be more difficult. > > > Having applied your 9261.diff: > > > > Now, when I <Enter> following the creation of a Frame, I'm > > automatically nested (nice!) but the environment is still Frame > > versus itemize, enumerate, standard, etc. Again, I wonder if this > > should be changed. However, I think this more-directly speaks to my > > earlier email regarding the appearance of "Frame" within the Frame. > > As I wrote, I think "Frame" is the expected default layout within a > Frame. It's synonymous to nested "Standard". > That's fine (and with the 9261 behavior, I'm much less opposed to how things behave); however, does this require a level of knowledge on the part of the user (regarding the subtleties of nested environments) that is reasonable? Again, using the PowerPoint straw man, most people think of presentations as collections of slides/frames with content. What does it mean to have frame-within-frame? > Thanks for testing, > Jürgen Thanks for the continued work and constructive dialog, Joel
beamer_cursor_regions.lyx
Description: Binary data
