On 2008-12-30, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:20:23PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
>> On 2008-12-12, rgheck wrote in gmane.editors.lyx.devel:
>> > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> >> rgheck writes:
>> >>> Support for optional arguments in list environments is weird.
>> You can
Guenter Milde wrote:
On 2008-12-12, rgheck wrote in gmane.editors.lyx.devel:
Really? It seems as if it'd be more useful to have the optional argument
to \item. At least, it'd be more useful for me.
Really? You can use ERT to give an (optional or mandatory) arg to an
\item but you need
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:20:23PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> On 2008-12-12, rgheck wrote in gmane.editors.lyx.devel:
> > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >> rgheck writes:
>
> >>> Yes, of course. But there are problems even there. Support for
> >>> optional arguments in list environments is weir
On 2008-12-12, rgheck wrote in gmane.editors.lyx.devel:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> rgheck writes:
>>> Yes, of course. But there are problems even there. Support for
>>> optional arguments in list environments is weird. If you put one in
>>> for the first item, it becomes the optional argume
On Friday 12 December 2008 15:11:18 Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > If you have problems with python just shout. ;-)
>
> aaa!
> p
And now you feel better, don't you? ;-)
This works anytime. :-)
If you have problems with the code that is in lyx just post here. If your
problems are not generally relat
Really? It seems as if it'd be more useful to have the optional
argument to \item. At least, it'd be more useful for me.
I agree with you , but it was implemented generally for environments
(with the problems you mention); the case of
enumeration was not part of the equation at the time.
JM
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
rgheck writes:
Yes, of course. But there are problems even there. Support for
optional arguments in list environments is weird. If you put one in
for the first item, it becomes the optional argument to the
environment, not to the item, and optional arguments to la
rgheck writes:
> Yes, of course. But there are problems even there. Support for
> optional arguments in list environments is weird. If you put one in
> for the first item, it becomes the optional argument to the
> environment, not to the item, and optional arguments to later items
> are silently i
José Matos wrote:
> On Thursday 11 December 2008 23:51:40 Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > from the lyx point of view python is a better idea; but i'm failing to have
> > some fun with learning python so i'll stay in bash :)
>
> If you have problems with python just shout. ;-)
aaa!
p
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
José Matos writes:
On Friday 12 December 2008 09:03:26 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"non optional arguments" actually.
Yes, of course. But there are problems even there. Support for optional
arguments in list environments is weird. If you put one in
rgheck wrote:
> Yes, this is the kind of thing JMarc suggested some time back. My
> intention is to get something fairly simple and extensible working,
> without worrying too much about all the options and how the user selects
> them. I'm no good at UI stuff, anyway.
I'm sure you will get help whe
José Matos writes:
> On Friday 12 December 2008 09:03:26 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> "non optional arguments" actually.
>
> "mandatory arguments" is probably easier to parse. :-)
Yes, but it does not convey the information that we already support
optional arguments.
> Even coming from a langu
On Friday 12 December 2008 09:03:26 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> "non optional arguments" actually.
"mandatory arguments" is probably easier to parse. :-)
Even coming from a language where double negatives are allowed it can be
confusing to decide if it is yes or two times no (a negative reinf
rgheck writes:
> The crucial part is the "with arguments".
"non optional arguments" actually.
JMarc
On Thursday 11 December 2008 23:51:40 Pavel Sanda wrote:
> from the lyx point of view python is a better idea; but i'm failing to have
> some fun with learning python so i'll stay in bash :)
If you have problems with python just shout. ;-)
> pavel
--
José Abílio
Pavel Sanda wrote:
RGH wrote:
InsetCommand-type insets. Similarly, it'd be nice to have real support for
paragraph layouts (command and environment) with arguments, and to be able
i'm not sure i understand what you exactly mean by the paragraph layouts.
how is it different from the th
RGH wrote:
> InsetCommand-type insets. Similarly, it'd be nice to have real support for
> paragraph layouts (command and environment) with arguments, and to be able
i'm not sure i understand what you exactly mean by the paragraph layouts.
how is it different from the thing we currently call 'env
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>
>> - building some script architecture (in bash) for checking of my
>> documents to be properly converted via lyx2lyx (ie check for lyx 1.x
>> -> 1.x+1). additionaly put some files in the tree, each with some
>> basic ly
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Ah, I see. So we want to text edit for general options, and also some
checkboxes and the like for specific ones?
Exactly.
If we can decide which ones, again, it will be easy to do.
Adding the sort&compress option would be enou
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>> Ah, I see. So we want to text edit for general options, and also some
>> checkboxes and the like for specific ones?
>
> Exactly.
>
>> If we can decide which ones, again, it will be easy to do.
>
> Adding the sort&compress option would be enough for now, as this is the
> one
Richard Heck schrieb:
Ah, I see. So we want to text edit for general options, and also some
checkboxes and the like for specific ones?
Exactly.
If we can decide which ones, again, it will be easy to do.
Adding the sort&compress option would be enough for now, as this is the one
requested
Uwe Stöhr schreef:
> proper ui to line setting in tables, adding support for tabular* and
tabularx
The table dialog needs 2 things:
- the usual Apply/OK/Cancel buttons. We have several complaints about
this per month in bugzilla, the Wiki, and the list. In my opinion this
is the most compl
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
rgheck schreef:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
José Matos schreef:
What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
Embedding/packaging/export_to_directory
The export-to-directory bit actually exists in very rough form. I
once had a private branch that di
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Richard Heck schrieb:
- possibility to add delete rows/columns via the tabular dialog.
Some users prefer not to use the table toolbar, but to use only the
dialog. There is no reason not having this feature in the dialog.
Note that it is already on the context menu, which see
rgheck schreef:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
José Matos schreef:
What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
Embedding/packaging/export_to_directory
The export-to-directory bit actually exists in very rough form. I once
had a private branch that did a simple sort of packaging, a
Richard Heck schrieb:
- possibility to add delete rows/columns via the tabular dialog. Some
users prefer not to use the table toolbar, but to use only the dialog.
There is no reason not having this feature in the dialog.
Note that it is already on the context menu, which seems to me to make
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> - try to implement proper text format features like real underlining,
> striking etc. This depends on the package soulutf, because the packages we
> currently use for this, are not able to deal with Unicode characters.
FWIW I will propose a patch soon that will switch from soul
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
- possibility to add delete rows/columns via the tabular dialog. Some
users prefer not to use the table toolbar, but to use only the dialog.
There is no reason not having this feature in the dialog.
Note that it is already on the context menu, which seems to me to make
the mo
> proper ui to line setting in tables, adding support for tabular* and tabularx
The table dialog needs 2 things:
- the usual Apply/OK/Cancel buttons. We have several complaints about this per month in bugzilla,
the Wiki, and the list. In my opinion this is the most complained thing we currently
On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Pavel Sanda wrote:
- building some script architecture (in bash) for checking of my
documents to be properly converted via lyx2lyx (ie check for lyx 1.x
-> 1.x+1). additionaly put some files in the tree, each with some
basic lyx feature, and run such checks automatical
leuven edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> being able to do a diff on two lyx docs and then use our change
> tracking user interface to merge in the changes.
This would be tremendously useful IMO. I did a short search and found a
couple of xmldiff projects (in python), but I am not sure that such
José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hi,
> following the previous message regarding the evaluation of the 1.6
cycle I
> would like to ask the same I have done before
> http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel-UqbJ+GOpo4+hPH1hqNUYSQ
public.gmane.org/msg123356.html
>
> For those
RGH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> José Matos wrote:
>> Where do you think that LyX needs more attention?
>>
>>
> I'm inclined to think that maybe 2.0 should do two main things: (i)
> introduce the XML file format and (ii) concentrate mostly on
> increasing stability, dealing with minor sorts of
> Where do you think that LyX needs more attention?
polishing and the removal of ui hacks
> What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
being able to do a diff on two lyx docs and then use our change tracking user
interface to merge in the changes.
together with lyx' version control s
José Matos wrote:
> Where do you think that LyX needs more attention?
>
> What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
i would be happy to have:
- overstrike text (iirc Uwe claimed to look on this?)
- better tuning of notes - gui for colors etc, easier sitching between
print/non-print
José Matos wrote:
> Hi,
> following the previous message regarding the evaluation of the 1.6 cycle I
> would like to ask the same I have done before
> http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg123356.html
>
> For those that do not bother (can) to follow the link the major points
> ar
José Matos wrote:
Where do you think that LyX needs more attention?
I'm inclined to think that maybe 2.0 should do two main things: (i)
introduce the XML file format and (ii) concentrate mostly on increasing
stability, dealing with minor sorts of UI bugs (like the math toolbar
thing), and
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
José Matos schreef:
What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
Embedding/packaging/export_to_directory
The export-to-directory bit actually exists in very rough form. I once
had a private branch that did a simple sort of packaging, and even trunk
ha
José Matos schreef:
Hi,
following the previous message regarding the evaluation of the 1.6 cycle I
would like to ask the same I have done before
http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg123356.html
For those that do not bother (can) to follow the link the major points
a
> What feature do you think that LyX is missing badly?
Layout editor, because it is painful to define new character layout,
and define a new layout for a latex class.
Embedding, because it is difficult to share my lyx documents with others.
> Where do you intend to work during this development c
40 matches
Mail list logo
