Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jules Bean]

[Apologies for replying to a long-dead thread]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:20:39PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
   Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
   run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
   the font path.
  
  Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
  that.
 
 It's not always technically feasible as the X server might run on another
 machine than LyX.

Indeed.  But an RPM should certainly do its best to sort out any
integration issues; that is the whole point of having a 'distribution'
of linux, that the integration works.  Certainly I will try to make at
least the most common cases 'just work' in the .deb packages. (Which
presumably includes making sure that the local X server can find the
postscript fonts which are included with Debian's TeTeX packages).

  No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
  designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
  fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
  day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
  a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
  LyX tries to appeal to.
 
 Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
 Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of the user base _I_
 know, even less when given instruction.
 
  So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
  appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?
 
 xfontsel

Actually, X fonts are notoriously badly understood, especially by
people from a mixed computer usage background (i.e. using also some
windows or MacOS). I am fairly uncomfortable with xfontsel myself.  I
think LyX should at least strive for a pleasant default.


  Where have you documented its use for that purpose?
 
 Nowhere. I consider using xfontsel to learn about a system's font common
 knowledge.

I contend that this is not the case, especially for people mainly
using gnome or kde.

Jules

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 02:56:44PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
 Actually, X fonts are notoriously badly understood, especially by
 people from a mixed computer usage background (i.e. using also some
 windows or MacOS). I am fairly uncomfortable with xfontsel myself.  I
 think LyX should at least strive for a pleasant default.

I think patches to the install process are welcome. I just do not know 
exactly what is needed, what might work and what not.

André

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jules Bean]

[Apologies for replying to a long-dead thread]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:20:39PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
> > > run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
> > > the font path.
> > 
> > Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
> > that.
> 
> It's not always technically feasible as the X server might run on another
> machine than LyX.

Indeed.  But an RPM should certainly do its best to sort out any
integration issues; that is the whole point of having a 'distribution'
of linux, that the integration works.  Certainly I will try to make at
least the most common cases 'just work' in the .deb packages. (Which
presumably includes making sure that the local X server can find the
postscript fonts which are included with Debian's TeTeX packages).

> > No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
> > designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
> > fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
> > day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
> > a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
> > LyX tries to appeal to.
> 
> Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
> Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of "the user base _I_
> know", even less when given instruction.
> 
> > So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
> > appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?
> 
> xfontsel

Actually, X fonts are notoriously badly understood, especially by
people from a mixed computer usage background (i.e. using also some
windows or MacOS). I am fairly uncomfortable with xfontsel myself.  I
think LyX should at least strive for a pleasant default.


> > Where have you documented its use for that purpose?
> 
> Nowhere. I consider using xfontsel to learn about a system's font common
> knowledge.

I contend that this is not the case, especially for people mainly
using gnome or kde.

Jules

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 02:56:44PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
> Actually, X fonts are notoriously badly understood, especially by
> people from a mixed computer usage background (i.e. using also some
> windows or MacOS). I am fairly uncomfortable with xfontsel myself.  I
> think LyX should at least strive for a pleasant default.

I think patches to the install process are welcome. I just do not know 
exactly what is needed, what might work and what not.

André

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 04:50:54PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 01:39:43PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
 
  The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
  selection dialog.
  
  I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the intuitive font
  selection dialog. I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
  XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
  see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.
 
 I quoted badly. If you read back, you'll see we were discussing both,
 and my comment is in response to the xfontsel bit

Why we don't have a code for adding LYXLIB/xfonts to the fontpath ?

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Dekel == Dekel Tsur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Dekel Why we don't have a code for adding LYXLIB/xfonts to the
Dekel fontpath ?

Because it is difficult to do in all generality and it is probably
something that should be done by the packager (different for debian,
redhat, cygwin...)

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 04:50:54PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 01:39:43PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> 
> > >The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> > >selection dialog.
> > 
> > I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the "intuitive font
> > selection dialog". I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
> > XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
> > see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.
> 
> I quoted badly. If you read back, you'll see we were discussing both,
> and my comment is in response to the xfontsel bit

Why we don't have a code for adding LYXLIB/xfonts to the fontpath ?

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Dekel> Why we don't have a code for adding LYXLIB/xfonts to the
Dekel> fontpath ?

Because it is difficult to do in all generality and it is probably
something that should be done by the packager (different for debian,
redhat, cygwin...)

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:30:11PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
  Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
  find this out easily?
 
 I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

Then the next person will complain about sluggishness...

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
 is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
 sloppily rendered line drawings).

This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.

For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts are
... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit strong.

 But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
 is it, Times or what?)

It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit-Preferences-
ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
menu) is good for?

 My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
 are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 

So why don't you use them in LyX?

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 02:59:11PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
 I think it was just the ordering of the two texts and then comparing
 LyX to TeXmacs (ie. using TeXmacs as a reference) that gave the
 impression TeXmacs was an older if not more mature product.  No big
 deal.

Hm, I was actually a bit surprised with the outcome of the rating, LyX
vs TeXMacs. But given the limited scope of the comparison, it even looks
fair -- except that I'd expected to get some bonus for accessibility as in
you can use any font you like on screen and do not have to use fonts
intended for printing and for the hard to edit things like negative
space (\!) ... But then, I am certainly biased... *shrug*...

 The biggest problem people will face is which to choose.  Your paper
 does give a pretty good overview.

For the intended scope this is certainly true.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
  is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
  sloppily rendered line drawings).
 
 This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.
 
 For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
 symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts are
 ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit
 strong.

LaTeX fonts? How?

 
  But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
  is it, Times or what?)
 
 It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit-Preferences-
 ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
 menu) is good for?
 
  My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
  are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 
 
 So why don't you use them in LyX?

Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
as a final configuration option for the experts.

Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool Emacs
offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will get you a
matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the default font
in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of italics, bold,
large and so on from an appropriate scheme to match it.

LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
_few_ buttons.

BTW, the Customization section does not deal with how to avoid
constant justification on line ends, and the menus don't offer
anything in that line, either.

This is all LyX-1.2.0.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
  is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
  sloppily rendered line drawings).
 
 This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.
 
 For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
 symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts are
 ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit strong.
 
  But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
  is it, Times or what?)
 
 It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit-Preferences-
 ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
 menu) is good for?
 
  My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
  are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 
 
 So why don't you use them in LyX?

Just for a try, I replaced times in the font selection scheme with
fixed.  I now get a display with an array of wildly inconsistent
font sizes.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 David == David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

David Just for a try, I replaced times in the font selection scheme
David with fixed. I now get a display with an array of wildly
David inconsistent font sizes.

Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you want
to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  David == David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 David Just for a try, I replaced times in the font selection scheme
 David with fixed. I now get a display with an array of wildly
 David inconsistent font sizes.
 
 Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you want
 to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

Yes, have it unchecked.  If I check it I get fonts that could not
impress game consoles from ten years ago.  Which is what I would have
expected, and I certainly don't fault LyX for offering an option to
at least try this.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Angus Leeming]

David Kastrup wrote:
 Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
 symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts
 are ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit
 strong.
 
 LaTeX fonts? How?

You should have a directory 
/usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts
or such like (depends how you installed LyX). It contains a bunch of 
symbolic links to the fonts that the math editor can use.

aleem@pneumon:aleem- ls /usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts
cmex10.pfb@   cmr10.pfb@eufm10.pfb@   fonts.scale   msbm10.pfb@
cmmi10.pfb@   cmsy10.pfb@   fonts.dir msam10.pfb@

All /you/ have to do is tell X where to find this directory. I have this in 
my .xsession file:

#
# Some fonts for LyX
#
lyxmathfontsdir=/usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts

if [ -d $lyxmathfontsdir ]; then
xset q | grep $lyxmathfontsdir
if [ $?  -ne 0 ]; then
# directory is not already in the font path
# so add it:
xset +fp $lyxmathfontsdir; xset fp rehash
fi
fi


Best regards,
Angus

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
  symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts are
  ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit
  strong.
 
 LaTeX fonts? How?

Automatically if your X server is set up to use them.

Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always run it
from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts  in the font path.

  So why don't you use them in LyX?
 
 Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
 always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
 to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
 as a final configuration option for the experts.

Come on. You are complaining that you can't use Emacs 20xsomething screen
font but are unable to locate it with xfontsel?

 Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool Emacs
 offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will get you a
 matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the default font
 in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of italics, bold, large
 and so on from an appropriate scheme to match it.

LyX is not intended as a replacement for your favourite OS.
You will have to use external tools from time to time I am afraid.

 LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
 from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
 digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
 should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking _few_
 buttons.
 
 BTW, the Customization section does not deal with how to avoid constant
 justification on line ends, and the menus don't offer anything in that
 line, either.
 
 This is all LyX-1.2.0.

Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to fix the
documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 David == David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

David Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  David == David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
David Just for a try, I replaced times in the font selection scheme
David with fixed. I now get a display with an array of wildly
David inconsistent font sizes.
  Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you
 want to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

David Yes, have it unchecked. If I check it I get fonts that could
David not impress game consoles from ten years ago. 

You can have good result with microsoft truetype fonts, which give
pretty good rendering on screen.

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:34:38AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 Just for a try, I replaced times in the font selection scheme with
 fixed.  I now get a display with an array of wildly inconsistent
 font sizes.

Maybe you don't have 'fixed' in the 'consistent' sizes for all shapes
and your 'fixed' font is not scalable?

I am getting tired (again) of your whining. I am not even willing to have
a look whether there are real problems anymore...

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
   For ordinary characters like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
   symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying math fonts are
   ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings is a bit
   strong.
  
  LaTeX fonts? How?
 
 Automatically if your X server is set up to use them.
 
 Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
 run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
 the font path.

Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
that.

   So why don't you use them in LyX?
  
  Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
  always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
  to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
  as a final configuration option for the experts.
 
 Come on. You are complaining that you can't use Emacs 20xsomething screen
 font but are unable to locate it with xfontsel?

No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
LyX tries to appeal to.

  Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool
  Emacs offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will
  get you a matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the
  default font in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of
  italics, bold, large and so on from an appropriate scheme to match
  it.
 
 LyX is not intended as a replacement for your favourite OS.  You
 will have to use external tools from time to time I am afraid.

So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?  Where have you
documented its use for that purpose?

 Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to
 fix the documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.

Always nice to hear suggestions like that from somebody who has
explicitly stated that he would certainly never be willing to
contribute even to those components of preview-latex that will be used
within LyX.

Just as a reminder: I am reviewing LyX, not using it.  I don't see why
I should be prohibited from reviewing it unless I am going to fix all
its perceived faults myself.

If you don't want to hear criticism, that's ok with me.  I thought
that it would be courteous to give you feedback about my findings,
but apparently I have been mistaken.

Sorry for that,

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

 LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
 from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
 digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
 should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
 _few_ buttons.

Very true.

regards
john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:20:39PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
  run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
  the font path.
 
 Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
 that.

It's not always technically feasible as the X server might run on another
machine than LyX.

 No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
 designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
 fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
 day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
 a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
 LyX tries to appeal to.

Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of the user base _I_
know, even less when given instruction.

 So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
 appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?

xfontsel

 Where have you documented its use for that purpose?

Nowhere. I consider using xfontsel to learn about a system's font common
knowledge.

  Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to
  fix the documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.
 
 Always nice to hear suggestions like that from somebody who has
 explicitly stated that he would certainly never be willing to
 contribute even to those components of preview-latex that will be used
 within LyX.

Because I know that I'll spend more time arguing with you than doing any
productive work.

 Just as a reminder: I am reviewing LyX, not using it.  I don't see why
 I should be prohibited from reviewing it unless I am going to fix all
 its perceived faults myself.

Do whatever you like. I do as well. No problem.

 If you don't want to hear criticism, that's ok with me.
 I thought that it would be courteous to give you feedback about my
 findings, but apparently I have been mistaken.

Indeed. And you asked for comments.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:

 Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
 Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of the user base _I_
 know, even less when given instruction.

Do I count ? I don't want to pissing around with some weirdo X shit,
thankyouverymuch. The font path problem is a difficult one though.

The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
selection dialog.

regards
john
-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:13:07PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
  Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
  Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of the user base _I_
  know, even less when given instruction.
 
 Do I count ?

Yes.

Now that David is gone I can admit that :-)

 I don't want to pissing around with some weirdo X shit,
 thankyouverymuch. The font path problem is a difficult one though.

I know. If I knew a simple solution I'd try to implement it.
 
 The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
 selection dialog.

Fine.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Angus Leeming]

On Tuesday 13 August 2002 12:15 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
 Now that David is gone I can admit that :-)

I was rather surprised by both your reactions to each others comments.

  The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
  selection dialog.

But doesn't use it yet? The reason I ask is that, with Qt, I get horrible 
ugly bitmapped fonts that are about 10 times the size of those in the xforms 
view and I don't have a Qt way to change them ;-)

Not worried of course, just info.

Angus

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Juergen Vigna]

John Levon wrote:
 The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
 selection dialog.

I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the intuitive font
selection dialog. I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.

   Jug

-- 
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mitterstrich 151/A  Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253
I-39050 SteineggWeb: http://www.lyx.org/~jug
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:50:29AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 
  LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
  from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
  digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
  should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
  _few_ buttons.
 
 Very true.

I agree that current font selection is not intuitive.
But this is not relevant to your paper which should be a general review of
the various paradigms.

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:12:30PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:

   The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
   selection dialog.
 
 But doesn't use it yet? The reason I ask is that, with Qt, I get horrible 
 ugly bitmapped fonts that are about 10 times the size of those in the xforms 
 view and I don't have a Qt way to change them ;-)

I haven't written the preferences form yet. I'm scared of the flames :)

regards
john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 01:39:43PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:

 The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
 selection dialog.
 
 I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the intuitive font
 selection dialog. I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
 XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
 see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.

I quoted badly. If you read back, you'll see we were discussing both,
and my comment is in response to the xfontsel bit

regards
john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:30:11PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> > Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
> > find this out easily?
> 
> I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

Then the next person will complain about "sluggishness"...

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
> is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
> sloppily rendered line drawings).

This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.

For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts are
... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit strong.

> But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
> is it, Times or what?)

It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit->Preferences->
ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
menu) is good for?

> My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
> are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 

So why don't you use them in LyX?

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 02:59:11PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> I think it was just the ordering of the two texts and then comparing
> LyX to TeXmacs (ie. using TeXmacs as a reference) that gave the
> impression TeXmacs was an older if not more mature product.  No big
> deal.

Hm, I was actually a bit surprised with the outcome of the "rating", LyX
vs TeXMacs. But given the limited scope of the comparison, it even looks
fair -- except that I'd expected to get some bonus for accessibility as in
"you can use any font you like on screen and do not have to use fonts
intended for printing" and for the "hard to edit" things like negative
space (\!) ... But then, I am certainly biased... *shrug*...

> The biggest problem people will face is which to choose.  Your paper
> does give a pretty good overview.

For the intended scope this is certainly true.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
> > is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
> > sloppily rendered line drawings).
> 
> This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.
> 
> For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
> symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts are
> ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit
> strong.

LaTeX fonts? How?

> 
> > But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
> > is it, Times or what?)
> 
> It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit->Preferences->
> ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
> menu) is good for?
> 
> > My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
> > are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 
> 
> So why don't you use them in LyX?

Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
as a final configuration option for the experts.

Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool Emacs
offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will get you a
matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the default font
in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of italics, bold,
large and so on from an appropriate scheme to match it.

LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
_few_ buttons.

BTW, the "Customization" section does not deal with how to avoid
constant justification on line ends, and the menus don't offer
anything in that line, either.

This is all LyX-1.2.0.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
> > is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
> > sloppily rendered line drawings).
> 
> This is _only_ for delimiters and accents.
> 
> For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
> symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts are
> ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit strong.
> 
> > But the text fonts also are not good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what
> > is it, Times or what?)
> 
> It is whatever you have chosen. What do you think Edit->Preferences->
> ScreenFonts (incidently the very first tab when opening the preferences
> menu) is good for?
> 
> > My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts that
> > are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_. 
> 
> So why don't you use them in LyX?

Just for a try, I replaced "times" in the font selection scheme with
"fixed".  I now get a display with an array of wildly inconsistent
font sizes.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "David" == David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

David> Just for a try, I replaced "times" in the font selection scheme
David> with "fixed". I now get a display with an array of wildly
David> inconsistent font sizes.

Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you want
to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > "David" == David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> David> Just for a try, I replaced "times" in the font selection scheme
> David> with "fixed". I now get a display with an array of wildly
> David> inconsistent font sizes.
> 
> Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you want
> to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

Yes, have it unchecked.  If I check it I get fonts that could not
impress game consoles from ten years ago.  Which is what I would have
expected, and I certainly don't fault LyX for offering an option to
at least try this.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Angus Leeming]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
>> symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts
>> are ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit
>> strong.
> 
> LaTeX fonts? How?

You should have a directory 
/usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts
or such like (depends how you installed LyX). It contains a bunch of 
symbolic links to the fonts that the math editor can use.

aleem@pneumon:aleem-> ls /usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts
cmex10.pfb@   cmr10.pfb@eufm10.pfb@   fonts.scale   msbm10.pfb@
cmmi10.pfb@   cmsy10.pfb@   fonts.dir msam10.pfb@

All /you/ have to do is tell X where to find this directory. I have this in 
my .xsession file:

#
# Some fonts for LyX
#
lyxmathfontsdir=/usr/local/share/lyx-1.2.1cvs/xfonts

if [ -d $lyxmathfontsdir ]; then
xset q | grep $lyxmathfontsdir
if [ $?  -ne 0 ]; then
# directory is not already in the font path
# so add it:
xset +fp $lyxmathfontsdir; xset fp rehash
fi
fi


Best regards,
Angus

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
> > symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts are
> > ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit
> > strong.
> 
> LaTeX fonts? How?

Automatically if your X server is set up to use them.

Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always run it
from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts  in the font path.

> > So why don't you use them in LyX?
> 
> Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
> always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
> to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
> as a final configuration option for the experts.

Come on. You are complaining that you can't use Emacs 20xsomething screen
font but are unable to locate it with xfontsel?

> Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool Emacs
> offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will get you a
> matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the default font
> in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of italics, bold, large
> and so on from an appropriate scheme to match it.

LyX is not intended as a replacement for your favourite OS.
You will have to use external tools from time to time I am afraid.

> LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
> from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
> digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
> should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking _few_
> buttons.
> 
> BTW, the "Customization" section does not deal with how to avoid constant
> justification on line ends, and the menus don't offer anything in that
> line, either.
> 
> This is all LyX-1.2.0.

Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to fix the
documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "David" == David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

David> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > "David" == David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
David> Just for a try, I replaced "times" in the font selection scheme
David> with "fixed". I now get a display with an array of wildly
David> inconsistent font sizes.
>>  Do you have 'use scalable fonts' unchecked? This is better if you
>> want to have nice unscaled bitmap fonts for times.

David> Yes, have it unchecked. If I check it I get fonts that could
David> not impress game consoles from ten years ago. 

You can have good result with microsoft truetype fonts, which give
pretty good rendering on screen.

JMarc

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:34:38AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Just for a try, I replaced "times" in the font selection scheme with
> "fixed".  I now get a display with an array of wildly inconsistent
> font sizes.

Maybe you don't have 'fixed' in the 'consistent' sizes for all shapes
and your 'fixed' font is not scalable?

I am getting tired (again) of your whining. I am not even willing to have
a look whether there are real problems anymore...

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > For "ordinary characters" like 'a', \mathbb{R}, \sum  etc, either the X
> > > symbol font or suitable LaTeX fonts can be used. So saying "math fonts are
> > > ... basically being sloppily rendered line drawings" is a bit
> > > strong.
> > 
> > LaTeX fonts? How?
> 
> Automatically if your X server is set up to use them.
> 
> Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
> run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
> the font path.

Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
that.

> > > So why don't you use them in LyX?
> > 
> > Because the menu basically just offers entering an X font name?  It is
> > always a bear to dig through with xfontsel and try to find something
> > to match properly for every single font in use.  That should be left
> > as a final configuration option for the experts.
> 
> Come on. You are complaining that you can't use Emacs 20xsomething screen
> font but are unable to locate it with xfontsel?

No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
LyX tries to appeal to.

> > Note that even the programmer's editor and overall hacker tool
> > Emacs offers font selection schemes, where selecting a scheme will
> > get you a matching set of fonts.  And if I naively just select the
> > default font in my X defaults, Emacs will select a fitting set of
> > italics, bold, large and so on from an appropriate scheme to match
> > it.
> 
> LyX is not intended as a replacement for your favourite OS.  You
> will have to use external tools from time to time I am afraid.

So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?  Where have you
documented its use for that purpose?

> Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to
> fix the documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.

Always nice to hear suggestions like that from somebody who has
explicitly stated that he would certainly never be willing to
contribute even to those components of preview-latex that will be used
within LyX.

Just as a reminder: I am reviewing LyX, not using it.  I don't see why
I should be prohibited from reviewing it unless I am going to fix all
its perceived faults myself.

If you don't want to hear criticism, that's ok with me.  I thought
that it would be courteous to give you feedback about my findings,
but apparently I have been mistaken.

Sorry for that,

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
> from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
> digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
> should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
> _few_ buttons.

Very true.

regards
john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:20:39PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > Don't know what one uses with an installed version of LyX. I always
> > run it from the build dir and put /path/to/lyxbuild/lib/xfonts in
> > the font path.
> 
> Then perhaps the RPM for RedHat should take care to do something like
> that.

It's not always technically feasible as the X server might run on another
machine than LyX.

> No, I am complaining that getting a consistent font scheme with fonts
> designed for screen use (with a matching size set, and appropriate
> fonts for italic, slanted, bold and the like) would be the work of a
> day at least.  Certainly doable if I were interested in using LyX on
> a permanent base, but certainly quite above the head of the user base
> LyX tries to appeal to.

Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of "the user base _I_
know", even less when given instruction.

> So what external tool would you recommend for selecting an
> appropriate font set for screen use with LyX?

xfontsel

> Where have you documented its use for that purpose?

Nowhere. I consider using xfontsel to learn about a system's font common
knowledge.

> > Fine. Now that you've learned it, it should not too hard for you to
> > fix the documentation and submit it for inclusion in LyX.
> 
> Always nice to hear suggestions like that from somebody who has
> explicitly stated that he would certainly never be willing to
> contribute even to those components of preview-latex that will be used
> within LyX.

Because I know that I'll spend more time arguing with you than doing any
productive work.

> Just as a reminder: I am reviewing LyX, not using it.  I don't see why
> I should be prohibited from reviewing it unless I am going to fix all
> its perceived faults myself.

Do whatever you like. I do as well. No problem.

> If you don't want to hear criticism, that's ok with me.
> I thought that it would be courteous to give you feedback about my
> findings, but apparently I have been mistaken.

Indeed. And you asked for comments.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:54:42PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:

> Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
> Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of "the user base _I_
> know", even less when given instruction.

Do I count ? I don't want to pissing around with some weirdo X shit,
thankyouverymuch. The font path problem is a difficult one though.

The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
selection dialog.

regards
john
-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:13:07PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> > Maybe I am trying to appeal to different people than you think LyX tries.
> > Fixing a font path is certainly not above the head of "the user base _I_
> > know", even less when given instruction.
> 
> Do I count ?

Yes.

Now that David is gone I can admit that :-)

> I don't want to pissing around with some weirdo X shit,
> thankyouverymuch. The font path problem is a difficult one though.

I know. If I knew a simple solution I'd try to implement it.
 
> The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> selection dialog.

Fine.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Angus Leeming]

On Tuesday 13 August 2002 12:15 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Now that David is gone I can admit that :-)

I was rather surprised by both your reactions to each others comments.

> > The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> > selection dialog.

But doesn't use it yet? The reason I ask is that, with Qt, I get horrible 
ugly bitmapped fonts that are about 10 times the size of those in the xforms 
view and I don't have a Qt way to change them ;-)

Not worried of course, just info.

Angus

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Juergen Vigna]

John Levon wrote:
> The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> selection dialog.

I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the "intuitive font
selection dialog". I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.

   Jug

-- 
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._
Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mitterstrich 151/A  Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253
I-39050 SteineggWeb: http://www.lyx.org/~jug
-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:50:29AM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:32:41AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> > LyX trumpets user friendliness.  There is no point in keeping people
> > from having to learn a few mnemonic LaTeX commands, and then demand
> > digging into the X font system only to arrive at a configuration that
> > should either be the default, or easily configurable with clicking
> > _few_ buttons.
> 
> Very true.

I agree that current font selection is not intuitive.
But this is not relevant to your paper which should be a general review of
the various paradigms.

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 12:12:30PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:

> > > The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> > > selection dialog.
> 
> But doesn't use it yet? The reason I ask is that, with Qt, I get horrible 
> ugly bitmapped fonts that are about 10 times the size of those in the xforms 
> view and I don't have a Qt way to change them ;-)

I haven't written the preferences form yet. I'm scared of the flames :)

regards
john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 01:39:43PM +0200, Juergen Vigna wrote:

> >The Qt frontend will of course use Qt's useful, handy, intuitive, font
> >selection dialog.
> 
> I _really_ doubt that Qt can set the font-path in the "intuitive font
> selection dialog". I think you mix stuff here, one is configuring your
> XServer and the FontPath to all the fonts you would like the XServer to
> see, another mather is selecting something from this available fontlist.

I quoted badly. If you read back, you'll see we were discussing both,
and my comment is in response to the xfontsel bit

regards
john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 
 Available at
 URL:http://preview-latex.sourceforge.net/wysiwyg-draft.pdf.  Now
 the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
 certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
 talk itself is yet to happen.
 
 Comments?

Perhaps you should mention Texlite.

 It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math area does
  not seem to be optimized for readability.

What does this mean ?

 LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection with
  justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking and expanding 
  lines during normal text insertion.

LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right alignment,
without an impact on the latex output.

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 Comments?

Glancing over it it looks ok.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:38:14PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
  It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math area does
   not seem to be optimized for readability.
 
 What does this mean ?

That we draw paranthesis manually perhaps?

But again, nothing will be fixed if nobody complains.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Dekel Tsur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  
  Available at
  URL:http://preview-latex.sourceforge.net/wysiwyg-draft.pdf.  Now
  the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
  certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
  talk itself is yet to happen.
  
  Comments?
 
 Perhaps you should mention Texlite.
 
  It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math
   area does not seem to be optimized for readability.
 
 What does this mean ?

The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
sloppily rendered line drawings).  But the text fonts also are not
good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what is it, Times or what?)
rendered at screen resolution without antialiasing does not cut it for
readability.  Even with antialiasing, printer fonts at 100dpi would
not be too ergonomic (substituting a washed-out display of
well-rendered characters for a crisp display of badly rendered
characters), but at least more tolerable (take a look at TeXmacs
screenshots).

My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts
that are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_.
This criterion need not imply fixed fonts; it just happens that I find
the particular one I use more readable than the available proportional
fonts here.

  LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
   with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
   and expanding lines during normal text insertion.
 
 LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
 alignment, without an impact on the latex output.

Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
find this out easily?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

 Comments?

From my point of view, your comments on ERT are perhaps misleading. We
want to provide useful visual feedback for commonly used LaTeX/TeX
features - a really good example here would be short versions of
\section for TOC purposes.

We (or at least I) am not interested in chasing every nuance of TeX used
by TeXperts such as yourself - such power users are perfectly
comfortable writing in preambles, using ERT, etc. To make myself clear:
ERT will always be there.

What we want is good support for people like me who do not want to learn
LaTeX, but just want to produce a document, whilst allowing power users
to tweak to their heart's content.

regards
john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

 
 Comments?

another thing: I believe Angus has implemented preview mode for \input

regards
john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

   LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
and expanding lines during normal text insertion.
  
  LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
  alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
 
 Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
 find this out easily?

I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

regards
john
-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 
  
  Comments?
 
 another thing: I believe Angus has implemented preview mode for \input

Right.  I'll try to keep that in mind during the talk.  It provides a
(somewhat artificial) way of previewing arbitrary constructs by
placing them in a separate file.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

| On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
| 
|LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
| with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
| and expanding lines during normal text insertion.
|   
|   LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
|   alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
|  
|  Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
|  find this out easily?
| 
| I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

We used to have that. (or something similar, it was an optimization
hack).

I kindo like the instant reflow...

-- 
Lgb

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:42:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

 I kindo like the instant reflow...

I'll bite: why ?

john

-- 
It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims.
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
 Dekel Tsur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

   It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math
area does not seem to be optimized for readability.
  
  What does this mean ?
 
 The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
 is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
 sloppily rendered line drawings).  But the text fonts also are not
 good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what is it, Times or what?)
 rendered at screen resolution without antialiasing does not cut it for
 readability.  Even with antialiasing, printer fonts at 100dpi would
 not be too ergonomic (substituting a washed-out display of
 well-rendered characters for a crisp display of badly rendered
 characters), but at least more tolerable (take a look at TeXmacs
 screenshots).

It takes less than a minute to change the fonts to something better.
You can select any font you like, and the QT frontend development version
even gives you anti-aliasing: http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~dekelts/lyx/qt.png

  LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
  alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
 
 Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
 find this out easily?

It depends how careful he read the documentation. 

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Dekel Tsur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
  
  Available at
  URL:http://preview-latex.sourceforge.net/wysiwyg-draft.pdf.  Now
  the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
  certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
  talk itself is yet to happen.
  
  Comments?
 
 Perhaps you should mention Texlite.

I decided against it since I am basically presenting different WYSIWYG
paradigms, and TeXlite falls into the same category as WhizzyTeX:
instant update.  It is not available freely except on request to the
author, and I have heard it reported as being rather unstable.

So I decided to not miss much if I omit it.  All of the other
presented programs and systems are readily and freely available to the
reader of the article.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Allan Rae]

Figure 7 shows the editing experience for the various systems maths
editors -- except it sems for preview-latex.  I can't see a cursor in
that screen shot.  Shouldn't that show the actual editing experience
with the raw latex maths?  Actually, I'd rather you showed both the
preview and the editing much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though
that would almost be repeating Figure 6).

The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer than
TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just an
impression.

Otherwise I like it.

Allan. (ARRae)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Figure 7 shows the editing experience for the various systems maths
 editors -- except it sems for preview-latex.  I can't see a cursor in
 that screen shot.  Shouldn't that show the actual editing experience
 with the raw latex maths?

Detail view is the phrase, and when the preview is opened for
editing, there is not much preview to be seen.

 Actually, I'd rather you showed both the preview and the editing
 much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though that would almost be
 repeating Figure 6).

Yes, figure 6 is supposed to show the various states a preview can be
in.  Figure 7 shows a typical _single_ editing situation.  When you
use WhizzyTeX, _both_ windows are active at once and are part of the
editing situation.  With preview-latex, it is either open or closed.
One could only ponder whether one would try to make a screen shot
with one open and a different closed preview.

 The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer
 than TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just
 an impression.

Hm.  Where does the impression arise?  Actually, I would not even
know which of the two was younger.

 Otherwise I like it.

Actually, it _is_ amazing and nice how many different approaches are
already flying around.  You get a lot of choice (and in case of Emacs,
if you are unsatiable you can use all of the presented tools for it at
once).

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Allan Rae]

On 13 Aug 2002, David Kastrup wrote:

 Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
  Actually, I'd rather you showed both the preview and the editing
  much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though that would almost be
  repeating Figure 6).

 Yes, figure 6 is supposed to show the various states a preview can be
 in.  Figure 7 shows a typical _single_ editing situation.  When you
   

Exactly -- except it doesn't show the editing situation for
preview-latex.

 use WhizzyTeX, _both_ windows are active at once and are part of the
 editing situation.  With preview-latex, it is either open or closed.
 One could only ponder whether one would try to make a screen shot
 with one open and a different closed preview.

That might be a better and fairer option.

  The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer
  than TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just
  an impression.

 Hm.  Where does the impression arise?  Actually, I would not even
 know which of the two was younger.

I think it was just the ordering of the two texts and then comparing
LyX to TeXmacs (ie. using TeXmacs as a reference) that gave the
impression TeXmacs was an older if not more mature product.  No big
deal.

  Otherwise I like it.

 Actually, it _is_ amazing and nice how many different approaches are
 already flying around.  You get a lot of choice (and in case of Emacs,
 if you are unsatiable you can use all of the presented tools for it at
 once).

The biggest problem people will face is which to choose.  Your paper
does give a pretty good overview.

Allan. (ARRae)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Available at
> .  Now
> the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
> certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
> talk itself is yet to happen.
> 
> Comments?

Perhaps you should mention Texlite.

 "It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math area does
  not seem to be optimized for readability."

What does this mean ?

 "LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection with
  justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking and expanding 
  lines during normal text insertion."

LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right alignment,
without an impact on the latex output.

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Comments?

Glancing over it it looks ok.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Andre Poenitz]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:38:14PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote:
>  "It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math area does
>   not seem to be optimized for readability."
> 
> What does this mean ?

That we draw paranthesis manually perhaps?

But again, nothing will be fixed if nobody complains.

Andre'

-- 
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > 
> > Available at
> > .  Now
> > the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
> > certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
> > talk itself is yet to happen.
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
> Perhaps you should mention Texlite.
> 
>  "It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math
>   area does not seem to be optimized for readability."
> 
> What does this mean ?

The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
sloppily rendered line drawings).  But the text fonts also are not
good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what is it, Times or what?)
rendered at screen resolution without antialiasing does not cut it for
readability.  Even with antialiasing, printer fonts at 100dpi would
not be too ergonomic (substituting a washed-out display of
well-rendered characters for a crisp display of badly rendered
characters), but at least more tolerable (take a look at TeXmacs
screenshots).

My Emacs source text buffers use 20x10 fixed fonts.  That are fonts
that are actually designed for readability _at_ _screen_ _resolution_.
This criterion need not imply fixed fonts; it just happens that I find
the particular one I use more readable than the available proportional
fonts here.

>  "LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
>   with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
>   and expanding lines during normal text insertion."
> 
> LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
> alignment, without an impact on the latex output.

Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
find this out easily?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> Comments?

>From my point of view, your comments on ERT are perhaps misleading. We
want to provide useful visual feedback for commonly used LaTeX/TeX
features - a really good example here would be short versions of
\section for TOC purposes.

We (or at least I) am not interested in chasing every nuance of TeX used
by TeXperts such as yourself - such power users are perfectly
comfortable writing in preambles, using ERT, etc. To make myself clear:
ERT will always be there.

What we want is good support for people like me who do not want to learn
LaTeX, but just want to produce a document, whilst allowing power users
to tweak to their heart's content.

regards
john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> 
> Comments?

another thing: I believe Angus has implemented preview mode for \input

regards
john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> >  "LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
> >   with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
> >   and expanding lines during normal text insertion."
> > 
> > LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
> > alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
> 
> Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
> find this out easily?

I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

regards
john
-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
> another thing: I believe Angus has implemented preview mode for \input

Right.  I'll try to keep that in mind during the talk.  It provides a
(somewhat artificial) way of previewing arbitrary constructs by
placing them in a separate file.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Lars Gullik Bjønnes]

John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

| On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
| 
| > >  "LyX has the same update-per-keystroke policy that, in connection
| > >   with justification, leads to the concertina effect of shrinking
| > >   and expanding lines during normal text insertion."
| > > 
| > > LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
| > > alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
| > 
| > Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
| > find this out easily?
| 
| I believe we should implement a delay before reflowing anyway.

We used to have that. (or something similar, it was an optimization
hack).

I kindo like the instant reflow...

-- 
Lgb

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[John Levon]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:42:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:

> I kindo like the instant reflow...

I'll bite: why ?

john

-- 
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Dekel Tsur]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:16:51PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >  "It must be noted that LyX screen display in particular in the math
> >   area does not seem to be optimized for readability."
> > 
> > What does this mean ?
> 
> The default fonts on my system look like junk.  Sorry, that's how it
> is.  In particular, the math fonts plainly are awful (basically being
> sloppily rendered line drawings).  But the text fonts also are not
> good.  Some sort of printer fonts (what is it, Times or what?)
> rendered at screen resolution without antialiasing does not cut it for
> readability.  Even with antialiasing, printer fonts at 100dpi would
> not be too ergonomic (substituting a washed-out display of
> well-rendered characters for a crisp display of badly rendered
> characters), but at least more tolerable (take a look at TeXmacs
> screenshots).

It takes less than a minute to change the fonts to something better.
You can select any font you like, and the QT frontend development version
even gives you anti-aliasing: http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~dekelts/lyx/qt.png

> > LyX can be configured to show the text on screen with ragged right
> > alignment, without an impact on the latex output.
> 
> Good.  I'll find out how, now that I am told.  Will the casual user
> find this out easily?

It depends how careful he read the documentation. 

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > 
> > Available at
> > .  Now
> > the deadline for the proceedings is already over, but this will
> > certainly not be the last time I try to hand something in, and the
> > talk itself is yet to happen.
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
> Perhaps you should mention Texlite.

I decided against it since I am basically presenting different WYSIWYG
paradigms, and TeXlite falls into the same category as WhizzyTeX:
instant update.  It is not available freely except on request to the
author, and I have heard it reported as being rather unstable.

So I decided to not miss much if I omit it.  All of the other
presented programs and systems are readily and freely available to the
reader of the article.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Allan Rae]

Figure 7 shows the editing experience for the various systems maths
editors -- except it sems for preview-latex.  I can't see a cursor in
that screen shot.  Shouldn't that show the actual editing experience
with the raw latex maths?  Actually, I'd rather you showed both the
preview and the editing much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though
that would almost be repeating Figure 6).

The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer than
TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just an
impression.

Otherwise I like it.

Allan. (ARRae)

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[David Kastrup]

Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Figure 7 shows the editing experience for the various systems maths
> editors -- except it sems for preview-latex.  I can't see a cursor in
> that screen shot.  Shouldn't that show the actual editing experience
> with the raw latex maths?

"Detail view" is the phrase, and when the preview is opened for
editing, there is not much preview to be seen.

> Actually, I'd rather you showed both the preview and the editing
> much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though that would almost be
> repeating Figure 6).

Yes, figure 6 is supposed to show the various states a preview can be
in.  Figure 7 shows a typical _single_ editing situation.  When you
use WhizzyTeX, _both_ windows are active at once and are part of the
editing situation.  With preview-latex, it is either open or closed.
One could only ponder whether one would try to make a screen shot
with one open and a different closed preview.

> The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer
> than TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just
> an impression.

Hm.  Where does the impression arise?  Actually, I would not even
know which of the two was younger.

> Otherwise I like it.

Actually, it _is_ amazing and nice how many different approaches are
already flying around.  You get a lot of choice (and in case of Emacs,
if you are unsatiable you can use all of the presented tools for it at
once).

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Draft paper about WYSIWYG/LaTeX for TUG2002

[Allan Rae]

On 13 Aug 2002, David Kastrup wrote:

> Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > Actually, I'd rather you showed both the preview and the editing
> > much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though that would almost be
> > repeating Figure 6).
>
> Yes, figure 6 is supposed to show the various states a preview can be
> in.  Figure 7 shows a typical _single_ editing situation.  When you
   

Exactly -- except it doesn't show the editing situation for
preview-latex.

> use WhizzyTeX, _both_ windows are active at once and are part of the
> editing situation.  With preview-latex, it is either open or closed.
> One could only ponder whether one would try to make a screen shot
> with one open and a different closed preview.

That might be a better and fairer option.

> > The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer
> > than TeXmacs when the opposite is true.  Not really a problem just
> > an impression.
>
> Hm.  Where does the impression arise?  Actually, I would not even
> know which of the two was younger.

I think it was just the ordering of the two texts and then comparing
LyX to TeXmacs (ie. using TeXmacs as a reference) that gave the
impression TeXmacs was an older if not more mature product.  No big
deal.

> > Otherwise I like it.
>
> Actually, it _is_ amazing and nice how many different approaches are
> already flying around.  You get a lot of choice (and in case of Emacs,
> if you are unsatiable you can use all of the presented tools for it at
> once).

The biggest problem people will face is which to choose.  Your paper
does give a pretty good overview.

Allan. (ARRae)