> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm having trouble thinking of a truly intuitive inset-based method
Martin> Finally someone asking the right question!
Yes.
Martin> So the simplest solution is a collapsible text inset at the
Martin> start of a section (sub*(secti
On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 11:15:58PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 04:56:38PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
> > * src/frontends/xforms/forms/form_paragraph.fd: Implement short
> > versions (to go to TOC) for captions and sectioning headers.
>
> What UI would people
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 04:56:38PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> * src/frontends/xforms/forms/form_paragraph.fd: Implement short
> versions (to go to TOC) for captions and sectioning headers.
What UI would people like to see for this (mock-ups would be especially
useful) ? And then
On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 06:11:34PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
...
> >>
> >> Martin's patch. What blocks it being an inset now ? Why can't the ground
> >> work for that be done first ?
> >
> | Lack of skill, simply. This at least *works as is* and fixes a
> | hall-of-shame class feature d
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 06:06:26PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
|
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:09:42PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>>
>> > > Why can't this be done properly first time round ?
>> >
>> > Sorry, I don't follow. Do you mean my commit or M
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> I can't no ... it definitely needs more thought. And we need
John> some architectural support for proper context determination too
John> (re the discussions on extending the paragraph-changed signal to
John> be more general)
Yes, proba
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 05:37:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> John> Yes, we should. I think we should have the bottom of Edit-> be
> John> context-specific entries. That way the useless maths/tabular
> John> sub-menus won't be needed unless appropriate.
>
> Could you think of a nice wa
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:51:25PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
John> wrote:
>> The problem then is that we should have the menu title change
>> depending on what is under the cursor, and this is a bit difficult
>> to
John> Yes, we shou
On Friday 14 June 2002 2:53 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 02:26:56PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > Yes! This compiles.
> > >
> > > But does it do what it should? The idea is that somewhere you call
> > > InsetSection::insetShortTitle with an argument ins containing the te
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:51:25PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> The problem then is that we should have the menu title change
> depending on what is under the cursor, and this is a bit difficult to
Yes, we should. I think we should have the bottom of Edit-> be
context-specific entries. T
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 02:26:56PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Yes! This compiles.
> >
> > But does it do what it should? The idea is that somewhere you call
> > InsetSection::insetShortTitle with an argument ins containing the text
> > you want to be in the short title (sub-) inset. And then
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:36:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
John> wrote:
>> I'd rather see a Layout>Inset... which would work better with the
>> other Layout menu things. Angus sent a patch creating this lfun a
>> couple months ago,
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:36:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> I'd rather see a Layout>Inset... which would work better with the
> other Layout menu things. Angus sent a patch creating this lfun a
> couple months ago, I think.
"Layout" is a good place to make something unfindable. "Inse
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> We already have enough problems with hidden RMB dialogs (I've
John> some vague plans for an Edit->Properties... to fix this)
I'd rather see a Layout>Inset... which would work better with the
other Layout menu things. Angus sent a patch
On Friday 14 June 2002 2:12 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 01:24:26PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > Okay John, here is a sample of my ignorance [sentence conformant to
> > > Friday cultural context assumptions]. Attached. It does nothing yet --
> > > it just compiles. Exce
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 01:24:26PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Okay John, here is a sample of my ignorance [sentence conformant to Friday
> > cultural context assumptions]. Attached. It does nothing yet -- it just
> > compiles. Except in one place which I don't get (behind // for now).
>
> D
On Friday 14 June 2002 1:19 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 12:49:38PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > Yes, I saw InsetSection. Shouldn't we rather develop this further?
> >
> > /me looks
> >
> > lol. Your work is done ! :))
> >
> > > Hmmm, that would require making th
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 12:49:38PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
...
> > Yes, I saw InsetSection. Shouldn't we rather develop this further?
>
> /me looks
>
> lol. Your work is done ! :))
>
> > Hmmm, that would require making the paragraphs following the section
> > header (up to the next header
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 09:45:19AM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > How about a context-sensitive menu (CSM) -- right-click on a Section
> > paragraph -- I think the UI files (eg. default.ui) can handle defining
> > such menus can't they?
>
> Yes! Like in insetERT. But a bit orthogonal to this d
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:20:20PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> > A good start would be cp insetlabel.C insetshorttitle.C or something.
>
> Please no. Not another silly little dialog.
There is nothing wrong with little dialogs. There is a lot wrong with
bloated dialogs.
> How about a context-sen
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 03:20:20PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, John Levon wrote:
>
> > 1.3 is still some time away. I think the biggest issues with such an
> > inset are UI interaction ones.
>
> Now is the time to do it right. That was why the patch was blocked
> for 1.2.x
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, John Levon wrote:
> 1.3 is still some time away. I think the biggest issues with such an
> inset are UI interaction ones.
Now is the time to do it right. That was why the patch was blocked
for 1.2.x.
> I bet this isn't actually that hard. A first iteration could even use a
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 08:38:36PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Lack of skill, simply.
Nonsense :)
> This at least *works as is* and fixes a
> hall-of-shame class feature deficiency *now*. But if you feel that
> doing an inset for this is straightforward... feel free to outline
> it. I can h
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 06:06:26PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:09:42PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
>
> > > Why can't this be done properly first time round ?
> >
> > Sorry, I don't follow. Do you mean my commit or Martin's patch?
>
> Martin's patch. What blocks it be
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:09:42PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Why can't this be done properly first time round ?
>
> Sorry, I don't follow. Do you mean my commit or Martin's patch?
Martin's patch. What blocks it being an inset now ? Why can't the ground
work for that be done first ?
And I
On Thursday 13 June 2002 3:36 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:00:16PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > This is now (after Edwin's controller/view split of the paragraph dialog)
> > incorrect and will led to a core dump. When was the last time you tested
> > this ;-)
>
> This
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:00:16PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> This is now (after Edwin's controller/view split of the paragraph dialog)
> incorrect and will led to a core dump. When was the last time you tested this
> ;-)
This morning's CVS ;-))
> There may also be conflicts with my rece
On Thursday 13 June 2002 3:13 pm, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:00:16PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > There may also be conflicts with my recent (as of 5 mins ago) commit.
> > Could you fix/check and re-submit?
>
> Why can't this be done properly first time round ?
>
> regards
>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 03:00:16PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> There may also be conflicts with my recent (as of 5 mins ago) commit. Could
> you fix/check and re-submit?
Why can't this be done properly first time round ?
regards
john
--
"All is change; all yields its place and goes"
On Thursday 13 June 2002 2:56 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Resubmission of the patch from months ago, moved forward for 1.3.0cvs.
>
> Changelog:
>
> ---
> 2002-06-13 Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * lib/layouts/stdlayouts.inc:
> * lib/layouts/stdsections.inc:
> * src/Buff
Resubmission of the patch from months ago, moved forward for 1.3.0cvs.
Changelog:
---
2002-06-13 Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* lib/layouts/stdlayouts.inc:
* lib/layouts/stdsections.inc:
* src/BufferView_pimpl.C:
* src/ParagraphParameters.[Ch]:
* s
31 matches
Mail list logo
