On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, John Levon wrote: [...] > More hyperbole.
It's seems I'm wasting my time at the moment if all I can write is hyperbole. There I was trying to make a point with sarcasm but it seems to be wasted on you on a Friday. FYI, you have eyes and a brain that is capable of pattern recognition. We gave you a cursor (even one you can control with a mouse) you can do the search and replace by hand. Like we did in the good old days when I were a lad. Oh wait that's sarcasm again. Or is it hyperbole? > > So which apps are included in your survey of "What > > features/capabilities/preferences are acceptable for LyX to offer?" > > You clearly mis-understand. Consistency with other applications is not > the be-all and end-all. However, when we are inconsistent with ALL other > applications, we should ask ourselves some hard questions: why are we > doing it like this ? is there a strong justification for it ? is the > cost of inconsistency offset by the benefit of the UI ? I wish I could say "I feel your pain." about something as minor as an ellipsis. But I can't. I also can't understand why useability is a valid arguement for you but not for me. I am not opposed to cleaning up the interface or the code -- so in that respect I am in agreement with you. I just don't see why we need to be so uptight about a few minor oddities. So why can't we have a feature some others don't? Why can't we keep a feature that is useful at present? I don't believe you have justified this case. Just because an ellipsis won't be present if the non-default operation is selected? This seems excessive to me. Allan. (ARRae) Who will be leaving RSN to watch England beat Brazil.
