On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 12:38:12PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:47:45AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Dekel> Furthermore, InsetBibKey should show both the key and label.
> >
> > Yes. And if we are really ambitious, the label should be an editable
> > text inset (
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:47:45AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Dekel> Furthermore, InsetBibKey should show both the key and label.
>
> Yes. And if we are really ambitious, the label should be an editable
> text inset (to solve all the quoting problems).
It is probably not worth to spent
> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dekel> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:01:01PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 07:36:32PM +0100, Marko Ivancevic wrote: >
>> Is it normal that when a new reference is added to the bibliography
>> > reference list, the other re
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 09:01:01PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 07:36:32PM +0100, Marko Ivancevic wrote:
> > Is it normal that when a new reference is added to the bibliography
> > reference list, the other reference number are not re-adapted in the
> > text, as it is the ca
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 07:36:32PM +0100, Marko Ivancevic wrote:
> Is it normal that when a new reference is added to the bibliography
> reference list, the other reference number are not re-adapted in the
> text, as it is the case wiht references to figures?
I'm assuming that you use the biblio
Is it normal that when a new reference is added to the bibliography
reference list, the other reference number are not re-adapted in the
text, as it is the case wiht references to figures?
Thanks
--
Marko Ivancevic
Radiology, Geneva University Hospital
1211 GENEVA 14, SWITZERLAND
phone:41/22/37
