Helge Hafting wrote:
> Why? An old LyX will open files created with the new
> LyX just fine - because the .lyx file don't differentiate
> between the wrapfig and floatflt latex packages.
>
> The .lyx file format just specifies a "wrapped figure",
> which either of these packages implement.
But the
On Friday 07 September 2007 15:40:54 Helge Hafting wrote:
> If you still need a version change (for political reasons?)
> please give me a hint on how I change the file format
> and add the do-nothing-at-all conversion. I can then add
> that to my wrapfig patch.
The point that has been raised is
Richard Heck wrote:
> Would you need one if you DIDN'T change the \begin -- \end commands?
I would say yes. You never know how different the output might be. If we
detect a fundamental difference in advance, we cannot do anything if we don't
have a format change.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Helge Hafting wrote:
It is easy enough to make a patch that simply replaces
floatflt with wrapfig, by changing the \usepackage
as well as the \begin -- \end commands that LyX outputs.
Would that be an acceptable starting point?
I think this can be done without chan
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Helge Hafting wrote:
It is easy enough to make a patch that simply replaces
floatflt with wrapfig, by changing the \usepackage
as well as the \begin -- \end commands that LyX outputs.
Would that be an acceptable starting point?
I think this can be done without chan
Helge Hafting wrote:
> It is easy enough to make a patch that simply replaces
> floatflt with wrapfig, by changing the \usepackage
> as well as the \begin -- \end commands that LyX outputs.
>
> Would that be an acceptable starting point?
>
> I think this can be done without changing the file format
(Refer to the 'mark the text wrap float "broken"' for why.)
Wrapfig seems to work better than floatflt, at least wrapfig
outputs the figure in a case where floatflt silently looses it.
It is easy enough to make a patch that simply replaces
floatflt with wrapfig, by changing the \usepackage
as we
