> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dekel> Many changes:
Applied.
JMarc
> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dekel> Here is updated version of the patch, in which I've added the
Dekel> following:
I'll apply it.
JMarc
> "R" == R Lahaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
R> In principle, these dialogs should be file-extension sensitive
R> (tex: latex, nw: noweb etc.) but can be overwritten by choosing
R> from a button which lists the possible formats.
R> We may then even merge "File->Open" and "File->Import", if
Dekel Tsur wrote:
> Here is updated version of the patch, in which I've...
I think it would be better to have two dialogs
as an Import-dialog and an Export-dialog.
In principle, these dialogs should be file-extension
sensitive (tex: latex, nw: noweb etc.) but can be
overwritten by choosing from
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 07:21:08PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>
> To solve these problems, I've created a patch in which a format is considered
> "dummy format" if its extension is empty (I think that this is better than
> having a flag that says that the ps->fax converter is dummy).
Here is update
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 02:21:31PM +0200, Baruch Even wrote:
> > The faxcommand is part of a GUI (which we now disabled) to send a fax
> > directly from lyx (File->Fax). What could be cute is if I can define
> > an exporter command Fax which for example calls "ksendfax file.ps".
>
> What prevents
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
> On 03-Nov-2000 Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >
> > PS: Concerning the \faxcommand-question earlier today: Isn't it possible to
> > define an "converter" from .tex do ".fax" that produces the fax itself as
> > "sideeffect"? If that is true, there seems to be
On 03-Nov-2000 Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> PS: Concerning the \faxcommand-question earlier today: Isn't it possible to
> define an "converter" from .tex do ".fax" that produces the fax itself as
> "sideeffect"? If that is true, there seems to be no need for some special
> \faxcommand option at all
> I haven't recieved feedback on this issue.
No? Well:
> Note that option (1) will simplify the code, without limiting its power.
Go for it.
> On the other hand, the definition of two PDF format might be a bit confusing
> to the user.
That's not worth the additional complexity. Keep it as sim
On Fri, 03 Nov 2000, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:59:24PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> > > I do want that when exporting to PDF, the user will be able to choose
> > > between tex->pdf (pdflatex), or tex->dvi->ps->pdf.
> > > This is currently the only case when having two choices is
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:59:24PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> > I do want that when exporting to PDF, the user will be able to choose between
> > tex->pdf (pdflatex), or tex->dvi->ps->pdf.
> > This is currently the only case when having two choices is desired.
> > So maybe we just need to mark the
On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:45:32PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:24:42PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > > 2. Previously, when you had a linuxdoc document, in the view/export menus
> > > contained "HTML (using sgml2html)" AND "HTML (using tth)" (i.e. using the chain
> > > li
> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dekel> Again, an updated version of the patch. This time, the I've
Dekel> added a new feature to the patch: I've replaced the old import
Dekel> code by a new code that uses the converter code, so it is now
Dekel> possible for example to impo
On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:24:42PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>
> > 1. The patch adds a distinction between format name and extension.
> > Using the \format lyxrc tag we can define in lyxrc
> >
> > #name extension "pretty name"
> > \Format linuxdoc
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> Here is a "make Jose happy" patch:
>
> 1. The patch adds a distinction between format name and extension.
> Using the \format lyxrc tag we can define in lyxrc
>
> #name extension "pretty name"
> \Format linuxdoc sgml Linuxdoc
> \Format docbook
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 04:35:15PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>
> And yet another updated version of the patch.
Again, an updated version of the patch.
This time, the I've added a new feature to the patch:
I've replaced the old import code by a new code that uses the converter code,
so it is now po
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 12:52:15AM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 12:10:01AM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> > Here is a "make Jose happy" patch:
>
> Here is an update patch (few minor fixes).
>
And yet another updated version of the patch.
patch.gz
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 12:10:01AM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> Here is a "make Jose happy" patch:
Here is an update patch (few minor fixes).
patch.gz
18 matches
Mail list logo
