On Thu, 31 May 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> I don't think this is a good idea, what would be a good Idea is to put an
> "update" button in the Dialog so that a user can update the contents to the
> actual paragraph manually (without having to close and reopen the dialog!)
the problem is from a U
On 31-May-2001 Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 05:08:33PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>>
>> Jürgen (Jürgen who's putting on his gear for driving home with his
>> motorcycle before it's going to rain again)
>>
> Out of topic, I know. This week th
Angus Leeming wrote:
>
> On Thursday 31 May 2001 14:33, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > | > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > |
> > | Lars> Should be "Change Margins" (alt. modify) if course since the
> > | La
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 05:08:33PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
> Jürgen (Jürgen who's putting on his gear for driving home with his
> motorcycle before it's going to rain again)
>
Out of topic, I know. This week the outside temperature has been over 30 C
all the days. Tha
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 04:41:22PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
...
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:41:22 +0200 (CEST)
> Reply-To: Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Fo
On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> or perhaps we should decouple the spacings from the paragraph...
I don't think so.
> I_have no problem with having a paragraph "left margin, and right
> margin" option, but we should avoid adding too much to this so that
> the "correct/nice" solution
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Well then we probably should remove the vertical margins too as this also
| is manual layout and probably we should remove a lot of features and make
| lyx base it's output ONLY on paragraph styles!
That would be ideal, albeit a bit utopic.
| I think
On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>| This features right now only an indent from the actual left papermargin
>| to the right. It does nothing with the right margin! So the name you gave
>| it is right, it's just a horizontal offset/indent of
On 31-May-2001 Martin Vermeer wrote:
> There is a command in plain TeX called \narrower, which narrows both sides
> by the amount \parindent, default 20pt.
>
> I think that's a lot better than allowing the user to enter inches or mm's
> or points :-)
I don't want narrower margins I want to mov
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> We are in complete agreement.
Juergen> #:O(
Juergen> Well then we probably should remove the vertical margins too
Juergen> as this also is manual layout and probably we should remove a
Juergen> lot of features and make lyx base it'
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FormParagraph question
> Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 14:50:50 +0100
> X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.1.99]
> In-Reply-To: <
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| This features right now only an indent from the actual left papermargin
| to the right. It does nothing with the right margin! So the name you gave
| it is right, it's just a horizontal offset/indent of the paragraph on the
| left side!
offset is still
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > But this is not really an offset is it? It is a larger left margin,
| > right? (offset: move the whole par left/right without rebreak)
|
| Well a rebreak on the right side is always needed otherwise we w
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 03:29:02PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Lars> yes... this is possible. But with this we are going down the
> Lars> path of manual layout and I am not overly fond of this. We
> Lars> really need the user to be able to dynamically create new
> Lars> paragraph styles (
On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>| Agreed. This feature was proposed by Juergen and I was not really in
>| favor of it at the time. Moreover, if we are to do that, I'd rather
>| find a standard package that provides this feature than roll our own
>| macro. In fact, all macros but \LyX
On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> A! That penny has dropped again. And can this be done for the right
> margin also on a per-paragraph basis? Ie, the dialog should have:
>
> Enlarge Margins --
> Left __ Units
> Right __ Units
> --
On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> But this is not really an offset is it? It is a larger left margin,
> right? (offset: move the whole par left/right without rebreak)
Well a rebreak on the right side is always needed otherwise we would
go out of the paper, don't you think so? If I say
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Well that's always nice! So what do you propose I do to the dialog. Shall I
| just remove the offending "Offset" entry, or shall I leave things as they are
| but give the entry a better name such as has been proposed?
No no, you should create the use
On Thursday 31 May 2001 14:33, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> |
> | Lars> Should be "Change Margins" (alt. modify) if course since the
> | Lars> margins can also be made smaller
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| Lars> Should be "Change Margins" (alt. modify) if course since the
| Lars> margins can also be made smaller.
|
| This is more difficult...
|
| Lars> yes... this is possible. B
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Should be "Change Margins" (alt. modify) if course since the
Lars> margins can also be made smaller.
This is more difficult...
Lars> yes... this is possible. But with this we are going down the
Lars> path of manual layout and
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| A! That penny has dropped again. And can this be done for the right
| margin also on a per-paragraph basis? Ie, the dialog should have:
|
| Enlarge Margins --
| Left __ Units
| Right __ Units
| -
On Thursday 31 May 2001 13:47, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On 31-May-2001 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> |
> | > This looks fine to me (except the horizontal offset which does not
> | > make a lot of sense).
> |
> | Why? I find it usefull that yo
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 31-May-2001 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
|
| > This looks fine to me (except the horizontal offset which does not
| > make a lot of sense).
|
| Why? I find it usefull that you can define a horizontal offset at which
| the paragraph text starts (this
On 31-May-2001 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> This looks fine to me (except the horizontal offset which does not
> make a lot of sense).
Why? I find it usefull that you can define a horizontal offset at which
the paragraph text starts (this was before in the Extra Options). What
is senseless in
On Thursday 31 May 2001 11:37, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> I've go "Layout" and "Indent first" on the
> Angus> same line because the "Indent first" will be disabled for
> Angus> "most" Layout styles (Title, Section etc).
>
> What do you mean about indent being disabled? On which textcl
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Sorry, I'd got this wrong. The call I want to replace with a signal is
| LyXView::setLayout, called only by LyXView and in
The call in LyXView should be changed to call the correct LFUN
instead.
| BufferView::Pimpl::Dispatch():
| case LFUN_LAY
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> So, you'd like me to add the Toolbar combox to the dialog too?
Angus> Done (see attached).
This looks fine to me (except the horizontal offset which does not
make a lot of sense).
Angus> I've go "Layout" and "Indent first" on th
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
>> So, you'd like me to add the Toolbar combox to the dialog too? Done
>> (see attached). I've go "Layout" and "Indent first" on the same
>> line because the "Indent first" will be disabled f
On Thursday 31 May 2001 10:06, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Actually, I've been giving a little thought to updating the
> | Paragraph dialog as the user moves around the document.
> | If an inset dialog is open, then moving the cursor from one
>
On Thursday 31 May 2001 10:07, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> > > Now what does Apply and Ok, apply all the Layout as
> > > now or only the visible tab?
> > Your message is too cryptic for me; you'll have to explain further.
> It's just that now you don't see all options in one window so I wondered
>
On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
>> Now what does Apply and Ok, apply all the Layout as now or only the visible
>> tab?
>
> Your message is too cryptic for me; you'll have to explain further.
It's just that now you don't see all options in one window so I wondered
if only the visible fields
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Actually, I've been giving a little thought to updating the Paragraph dialog
| as the user moves around the document.
|
| If an inset dialog is open, then moving the cursor from one inset to another
| of the same type emits a signal and the dialog up
On 31-May-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> I think it is wrong... even if it is analog to the document syle
> change in the Document dialog.
>
> just my gut feeling. I don't have any strong opinions on this...
> except that it might hamper cleanup a bit.
Well I don't have strong feelings abou
On Thursday 31 May 2001 09:41, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> This seems good to me I just would like to know what Jean-Marc tells us
> about having the Layout-Combo also in the Layout Paragraph.
> Now what does Apply and Ok, apply all the Layout as now or only the visible
> tab?
Your message is too cry
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
|
| > So, you'd like me to add the Toolbar combox to the dialog too? Done (see
| > attached). I've go "Layout" and "Indent first" on the same line because the
| > "Indent first" will be disabled for "most" Layout s
On Thursday 31 May 2001 09:32, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Note also that the dialog now supports per-paragraph spacing, fullfilling
an
> | oft-stated wish by Lars!
>
> Yeah!
>
> (now help me with the Float dialog :-) )
Certainly. But note tha
On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> So, you'd like me to add the Toolbar combox to the dialog too? Done (see
> attached). I've go "Layout" and "Indent first" on the same line because the
> "Indent first" will be disabled for "most" Layout styles (Title, Section etc).
This seems good to me I
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Note also that the dialog now supports per-paragraph spacing, fullfilling an
| oft-stated wish by Lars!
Yeah!
(now help me with the Float dialog :-) )
| If people are happy with this, I might code it up ;-)
Without even looking at it, I am in favou
> Why did you remove the Type? IMO it would be good to be able to set the
> type of a paragraph too here (I yesterday asked what this Type is not
> to remove it ;), if I assume right the Type is the same as we now have
> in the combox on the mainscreen f.ex.: Standard, List, ... This is surely
> p
On 31-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> Note that the "Horizontal offset" is for the whole paragraph. Lars says that
> this should be removed and replaced with a "standard indented" paragraph
> style. Till that's written, the choice stays in the dialog.
Good choice! Also this is a left indent a
Here's an updated Paragraph dialog which addresses Jürgen and Lars points. I
think it's cleaner and clearer than the original, but what do you think.
Comments please!
Note that the "Horizontal offset" is for the whole paragraph. Lars says that
this should be removed and replaced with a "standa
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 30-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
|
| > Are the "Minipage" and "Floatflt" check buttons in FormParagraph->Extra
| > mutually exclusive? If so, I'll create a "Type" choice that will have the
the formParagaph->extra should be removed compleetely.
On 30-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> I'm not very familiar with Minipages, but this would require the use of a
> minipage? (Not that I have a problem with that, just enquiring?)
No, this just put's some extra stuff before the paragraph try it and have a
look at the LaTeX output.
> 3 tabbed f
On Wednesday 30 May 2001 15:26, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> On 30-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
>
> > Are the "Minipage" and "Floatflt" check buttons in FormParagraph->Extra
> > mutually exclusive? If so, I'll create a "Type" choice that will have the
>
> The only thing we should use in this box (a
On 30-May-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> Are the "Minipage" and "Floatflt" check buttons in FormParagraph->Extra
> mutually exclusive? If so, I'll create a "Type" choice that will have the
The only thing we should use in this box (and Lars surely doesn't agree
with me) is the indented paragraph
I've been re-designinging the FormParagraph dialog as something quick and
easy to do, but I have a question:
Are the "Minipage" and "Floatflt" check buttons in FormParagraph->Extra
mutually exclusive? If so, I'll create a "Type" choice that will have the
entries:
Normal | Minipage | Fl
On 06-Mar-2001 Allan Rae wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
>
>> Jürgen,
>>
>> I was browsing through FormParagraph and I've come across something that
>> confuses me. Do you really mean to "activate" the lines below that I've
>> highlighted with a "?", or should they be "deactiva
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Jürgen,
>
> I was browsing through FormParagraph and I've come across something that
> confuses me. Do you really mean to "activate" the lines below that I've
> highlighted with a "?", or should they be "deactivate"?
Possibly wrong. Although the handli
Jürgen,
I was browsing through FormParagraph and I've come across something that
confuses me. Do you really mean to "activate" the lines below that I've
highlighted with a "?", or should they be "deactivate"?
The reason I ask is because I have a little helper function that I thought
would sim
50 matches
Mail list logo
