2017-05-31 17:47 GMT+02:00 Richard Heck <rgh...@lyx.org>: > I see what's worrying you. > > The way I did the code, what we record are only *manual* changes to the > 'literal' value. Simply opening a dialog that has literal checked does > not change the recorded setting. If you *manually* set or unset it, then > we will remember that, and that will become the default. So we are not > really remembering the last value that was 'used', but only the last > value that was 'set'. This seems right to me. Just because I happen to > open the one citation in which I do not have 'literal' set, to modify > something else, shouldn't mean that becomes the default. >
I see. This strikes me sensible and sane, then. > > Note also that we only use the remembered value for 'new' citations > (which we detect by seeing if the key field is empty). > > I still think that people are going to run into the same problem I did: > a mix of literal and non-literal dialogs causing unexpected output. So, > in fact, I think it would be best if, for old documents (at least), we > did default to 'literal'. But we don't do that now. We could perhaps do > this by checking the original file format, which is held by Buffer.cpp. > Even then, though, once the document has been saved and re-opened, so is > now in 2.3 format, manual action will have to be taken to avoid the > mentioned problem. > Hm. I see what you mean, but don't see an elegant solution. > > Richard > > PS It's probably too late for this, but is there really a good use case > for mixing 'literal' and 'non-literal' citations in a single document? > I.e., might this not make more sense as a document-level setting? > Probably depends on the personal workflow. For me, it will probably be the default way now to use the non-literal way and just to enable literal for specific insets as I need it (i.e., have to enter LaTeX code). I would even prefer a setting per widget (not per dialog), but this turned out too complicated to implement. But maybe a preference setting for the default of new insets would fit both workflows? Jürgen
