On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:37:34PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers... > > > > > > Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability > > > to define what they really look like. Are they numeric (roman, Roman, > > > arabic or whatever the fourth LaTeX type of number is) or alphabetical > > > (upper or lower case) and so on? > > > > alpha/Alpha IIRC. Yes, that would be a great ability to have. > > I'm talking about the counters used for display in the various > sections etc. IEEEtran (or is it latex8?) for example uses a Roman > counter for section numbering but we display it within LyX as > what LaTeX (and most writers of latin languages) call arabic.
Hmmm, now it's my turn to say that I find that secondary. I can live with roman numerals being depicted as decimal ones, as long as they are seen to count. Which visualises the sectioning structure. Actually we have the same thing in itemized lists. We can beautifully redefine the bullets, but they show always the same in LyX, an *. (BTW do I remember wrong or were there different representations in older versions of LyX depending on env depth? That was cool if it was true :) > > Means support for David Carlisle's 'enumerate' package. (But that's > > for enumerated lists only.) > > No, it means support for his package would be made easier. I'm not > talking about the user defining them I'm talking about LyX matching > the output. Actually from the user viewpoint, supporting the package would be more useful, as it crosses a higher treshold. Accurate visual representation on the other hand, or lack of same, is IMO less critical. Actually I don't think supporting the package would even be very hard. > Allan. (ARRae) Martin
msg32905/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
