On 2011-05-10, Diego Queiroz wrote: >> >>> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone >> >>> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs. >> >>> "input") documents).
> This is a strong restriction. But the only one for truly consistent behaviour. If you want to export stand-alone, uncheck the master setting. > With this, in a document with thousand of pages I will obligated to > generate all pages? I do not agree. No, you can *include* the sub-documents and use the includeonly feature to compile a subset of sub-documents where LaTeX will ensure (almost) correct page numbers and references and LyX will use the parent doc settings instead of the child-doc ones. >> > Actually, I regularly compile stand-alone child docs (to save time on >> > checking the appearance in the output). I have set up a "stand-alone" >> > branch for math-macros and bibliography and I can live with the >> > question marks in the references. > This is another subject, but let's understand the question marks are a > problem to be solved too. This is solved by using "include" and "includeonly" instead of stand-alone compilation. I do not think that LyX must re-implement this feature. > I think it would be good if LyX doesn't generate so much errors, Actually, *you* generate the error -- a reference to a label that does not exist in the document. Setting a master (currently) is just an "editing hint" but does not change the way a document is compiled stand-alone. Maybe there could be better visual feedback in LyX, but this requires that the buffer is aware of the intended use: a) compile the master b) compile the master but "includeonly" the child c) compile the child stand-alone Maybe a configurable default-action for the compile buttons (and View>... menu items) could trigger the matching feedback in the buffer. (With the default-default action for documents that set the master and are input -> a) are included -> b) ) > but I vote against the generation of documents with "wrong" content > (i.e. the question marks). Otherwise, LyX could not stop on the first > error, as it already do today. That is, currently, if a error is found, > LyX just stops and warns the user. Even if the document can still be > generated by LaTeX. We didn't define LyX to "just continue and see what > you get" because we don't want this, right? I am not sure about this. If I remember right, the LaTeX run is done in nonstopmode but the output not opened in a viewer -> I'd like a "show output anyway" button in the error message dialogue. Having a look at the output is sometimes far more helpful than TeX error messages. > In the worst case, I'm in favor of a warning to the user about these "wrong" > things. I prefer this "continue but warn", so that e.g. unresolved references [??] do not go unnoticed but do not prevent me from checking page breaks or the position of floats. ... Günter
