Baruch Even wrote:
>
> * Garst R. Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010801 23:26]:
> > Michael Schmitt wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> > > display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> > > where colors were a valuable g
* Garst R. Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010801 23:26]:
> Michael Schmitt wrote:
> >
> > I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> > display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> > where colors were a valuable good.
>
> Well, I could live with
Michael Schmitt wrote:
>
> I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> where colors were a valuable good.
Well, I could live without it, but my just published AlphaBeast book has
39 color figures
* Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010801 17:24]:
>
> On 01-Aug-2001 Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >> I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> >> display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> >> where colors were a valuable good.
> >
> > Colors
On 01-Aug-2001 Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
>> display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
>> where colors were a valuable good.
>
> Colors are still valueable on laptops
Well then you can decide that
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> > display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> > where colors were a valuable good.
>
> Colors are still valueable on laptops
Well, even my four yea
> I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
> display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
> where colors were a valuable good.
Colors are still valueable on laptops
Ander'
--
André Pönitz . [EM
I agree with you that it is not really necessary to provide different
display options for figures. I assume this is a feature from old days
where colors were a valuable good.
Michael
--
==
Michael Schmitt
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 12:52:58PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
> On 01-Aug-2001 Dekel Tsur wrote:
>
> > I don't think it is a good idea to have the display options per figure.
> > I think that in the dialog you should only have a 'don't display' check button,
> > and in the preferences dialog
On 01-Aug-2001 Dekel Tsur wrote:
> I don't think it is a good idea to have the display options per figure.
> I think that in the dialog you should only have a 'don't display' check button,
> and in the preferences dialog you can choose between displaying the figures in
> monochrome/color.
Is th
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 01:00:30PM +0300, Baruch Even wrote:
> * Michael Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010801 12:56]:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Bug1: In the graphics inset dialog, the OK button is not activated if I
> > switch between the various display options.
>
> The various display options are not
* Michael Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010801 12:56]:
> Hello!
>
> Bug1: In the graphics inset dialog, the OK button is not activated if I
> switch between the various display options.
The various display options are not working right now anyhow :-)
Will be taken care of when I actually make the
Hello!
Bug1: In the graphics inset dialog, the OK button is not activated if I
switch between the various display options.
Bug2: I installed ImageMagick in order to view my images on screen
but nothing is happening. In the preferences dialog, "convert EPS:$$i
PNG:$$o" is specified for EPS->PNG.
13 matches
Mail list logo
