> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> When does Menu::update() get called exactly ?
I think it is after each lyxfunc::dispatch. However, we can tweak this
behaviour to get what we (you) need.
JMarc
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 11:09:51AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Don't bother with it. generating this does not cost anything. The only
> proble is with the various TOCS, I think (although I'd like to have
> hard numbers on a large file: how much does TOC generation cost?).
It is not rea
On Monday 25 March 2002 05:08 am, you wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > In normal 1.1.6, this icon stands for maths... But now, I cannot see
> > what it means.
>
> AFAIK it's an abacus (or slide rule or how do you math guys call that?)
abacus it is, note that abacus != slide rule
Cheers,
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I thought that all toolbar in KDE apps were supposed to be setable
>> by the user as floating top, bottom, whatever... However, we could
>> have
John> right, but it is up to the app to store the state of the session
John> ...
Feel free t
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 10:17:55PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >yes, it would. I suspect they just hard code everything in; they don't
> >need to work with more than one frontend.
>
> Even these apps do not allow to redefine menus (a la word)? They suck.
I was wrong.
http://www.andamo
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 10:17:55PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >I could use tooltips I suppose ... a minor point anyway.
>
> Yes, but it is all these minor points that make a polished UI.
But I suspect we have a long time until 1.3.final :)
> >hmm ? It's a hint - frontends are free to
>>Can you use the tooltip text for that? Otherwise, we could add names
>>in the toolbar specification.
>
> I could use tooltips I suppose ... a minor point anyway.
Yes, but it is all these minor points that make a polished UI.
>>John> horizontal, vertical, t,b,l,r too...
>>
>>This is probably a
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 05:46:26PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> John> no, I mean each /button/ needs a name.
>
> Can you use the tooltip text for that? Otherwise, we could add names
> in the toolbar specification.
I could use tooltips I suppose ... a minor point anyway.
> John> horizo
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> no, I mean each /button/ needs a name.
Can you use the tooltip text for that? Otherwise, we could add names
in the toolbar specification.
John> Also we want to be able to specify whether a toolbar should be
John> horizontal, vertical
John Levon wrote:
> I think you missed the compliment to Andre in JMarc's joke :)
Oh bugger. I hate monday mornings ;-)
Juergen.
> john
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 11:08:58AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > In normal 1.1.6, this icon stands for maths... But now, I cannot see
> > what it means.
>
> AFAIK it's an abacus (or slide rule or how do you math guys call that?)
I think you missed the comp
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> In normal 1.1.6, this icon stands for maths... But now, I cannot see
> what it means.
AFAIK it's an abacus (or slide rule or how do you math guys call that?)
Juergen.
> JMArc
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 09:53:12AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Andre> wrote:
>> Yes, why not use these for 1.2.0? Except that I cannot guess what
>> the icon to the right of TeX means :)
Andre> It does not matter... isn't 1.2.0 so
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 10:08:01AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> John> also, I need a name for each icon that can be shown in qt when
> John> the toolbar is too wide... oh, and some moving around of
> John> setPixmap to be GUII (I'll do that soon in my guii tree)
>
> Yes, the plan was to
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> also, I need a name for each icon that can be shown in qt when
John> the toolbar is too wide... oh, and some moving around of
John> setPixmap to be GUII (I'll do that soon in my guii tree)
Yes, the plan was to have names for the toolba
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 09:53:12AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Yes, why not use these for 1.2.0? Except that I cannot guess what the
> icon to the right of TeX means :)
It does not matter... isn't 1.2.0 some mysterious release?
So having mysterious icons, too, does not sound inappropriat
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> I remember the KLyX icons to be rather ugly. What about
Juergen> those:
Juergen> http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/Reinhard.Stepanek/lyx/lyx_artwork_icons.html
Yes, why not use these for 1.2.0? Except that I cannot guess wha
On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 11:53:12AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> (eg, it'd be nice to have multiple short Toolbars the can abutt each other
> rather than have a new line all there own.
This needs a little tweak: ToolbarNew as well as Separator and Newline.
Easy. I've found the toolbar stuff to
On Friday 22 March 2002 11:46 am, John Levon wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 02:32:49PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> > > And also we can easily have per-toolkit preferences for icons, by
> > > simply naming then buffer-new-gnome.xpm or whatever.
> >
> > Personally, I'd rather we ship one set of stan
On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 02:32:49PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> > And also we can easily have per-toolkit preferences for icons, by
> > simply naming then buffer-new-gnome.xpm or whatever.
>
> Personally, I'd rather we ship one set of standard icons. Any
This is fine by me, I was just elucidating
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 10:06:16AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
>
> > I remember the KLyX icons to be rather ugly. What about those:
> >
> > http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/Reinhard.Stepanek/lyx/lyx_artwork_icons.html
>
>
> yes, perhaps. of course, the i
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 10:06:16AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> I remember the KLyX icons to be rather ugly. What about those:
>
> http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/Reinhard.Stepanek/lyx/lyx_artwork_icons.html
yes, perhaps. of course, the icons are themeable. And it would be easy
to make the
Allan Rae wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, John Levon wrote:
> > A couple of hacks, and Qt has a mostly working toolbar :
> >
> > http://movementarian.org/ss2.png
>
> Sexy. Maybe we should also steal some of the klyx icons so we look
> prettier.
I remember the KLyX icons to be rather ugly. What abo
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 01:19:34PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> > no, that would be lame ... I don't even handle xforms events any more :)
>
> Cool, I thought you were still dreaming about using a Qt object
> (ScrolledArea or somewuch) as a replacement for WorkArea I didn't
> realise you'd switched
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 12:32:56PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > Sexy. Maybe we should also steal some of the klyx icons so we look
> > prettier.
>
> Yeah, probably a good idea.
>
> > You're still using the X11/XForms rendering of the work area aren't
> >
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 12:32:56PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> Sexy. Maybe we should also steal some of the klyx icons so we look
> prettier.
Yeah, probably a good idea.
> You're still using the X11/XForms rendering of the work area aren't
> you?
no, that would be lame ... I don't even handle x
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, John Levon wrote:
>
> A couple of hacks, and Qt has a mostly working toolbar :
>
> http://movementarian.org/ss2.png
Sexy. Maybe we should also steal some of the klyx icons so we look
prettier.
You're still using the X11/XForms rendering of the work area aren't
you?
Allan.
A couple of hacks, and Qt has a mostly working toolbar :
http://movementarian.org/ss2.png
regards
john
--
"Committee iq: average intelligence of members, divide by headcount."
- Rob Landley
28 matches
Mail list logo
