Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Basically, the main stated plan for the 1.6 branch is switching our file format to some correctly formed xml. There is already some proof-of-concept code to do that in a branch. This will force us to have a more unified way to access the parameters, and I was

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Basically, the main stated plan for the 1.6 branch is switching our file format to some correctly formed xml. There is already some proof-of-concept code to do that in a branch. This will force us to have a more unified way to access the parameters, and I was

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Except if this serialization can be merged with the writing of the xml parameters once we switch to that. In this case, the thing would make more sense (and allow to define bindings to tune

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Basically, the main stated plan for the 1.6 branch is switching our file format to some correctly formed xml. There is already some proof-of-concept code to do that in a branch. This will force us to What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too Tommaso complex for LyX ? The lyx document format is supposed to reflect what LyX is able to handle. I am not sure ODF is usable, since we have no plan to implement

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too Tommaso complex for LyX ? The lyx document format is supposed to reflect what LyX is able to handle. I am not sure ODF is usable, since we

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Wednesday 11 July 2007 10:30:47 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Tommaso Plus, what about maths ? Would they be represented as smth. Tommaso like MathML instead of plain LaTeX that you have now ? I think there are problems related to that (latex (and lyx) LyX is more on the presentational

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too complex for LyX ? It would be discussed after 1.5.0 but ODF may be steered too much to WYSIWYG (single character and paragraph styles etc) to be used by lyx/latex. However, being able to embed figures, and having an internal exporter

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:36:52AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too Tommaso complex for LyX ? The lyx document format is supposed to

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Bo Peng ha scritto: It would be discussed after 1.5.0 but ODF may be steered too much to WYSIWYG (single character and paragraph styles etc) to be used by Isn't LyX already moving towards supporting custom paragraph styles ? I saw a Paragraph Settings dialog (and actually I'm a little bit

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

> "Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tommaso> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: >> Except if this serialization can be merged with the writing of the >> xml parameters once we switch to that. In this case, the thing >> would make more sense (and allow to define bindings

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Basically, the main stated plan for the 1.6 branch is switching our file format to some correctly formed xml. There is already some proof-of-concept code to do that in a branch. This will force us to What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

> "Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tommaso> What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too Tommaso> complex for LyX ? The lyx document format is supposed to reflect what LyX is able to handle. I am not sure ODF is usable, since we have no plan to

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tommaso> What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too Tommaso> complex for LyX ? The lyx document format is supposed to reflect what LyX is able to handle. I am not sure ODF is usable,

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Wednesday 11 July 2007 10:30:47 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Tommaso> Plus, what about maths ? Would they be represented as smth. > Tommaso> like MathML instead of plain LaTeX that you have now ? > > I think there are problems related to that (latex (and lyx) LyX is > more on the

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too complex for LyX ? It would be discussed after 1.5.0 but ODF may be steered too much to WYSIWYG (single character and paragraph styles etc) to be used by lyx/latex. However, being able to embed figures, and having an internal exporter

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 11:36:52AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>"Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >Tommaso> What about the OO OpenDocument xml format ? Would it be too > >Tommaso> complex for LyX ? > > > >The lyx document

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Bo Peng ha scritto: It would be discussed after 1.5.0 but ODF may be steered too much to WYSIWYG (single character and paragraph styles etc) to be used by Isn't LyX already moving towards supporting custom paragraph styles ? I saw a Paragraph Settings dialog (and actually I'm a little bit

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On 7/10/07, Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, as a newbie of the LyX code, I'm just curious about the purpose of the FuncRequest/dispatch mechanism. Specifically, it is not clear to me why from the GUI some functions produce a formatted text string that is dispatched through a

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso While this could be useful to allow activation of the Tommaso functionality from the action buffer or a script, why don't Tommaso just call the method, instead, from the GUI classes ? This was part of the Model/View/Controller

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso While this could be useful to allow activation of the Tommaso functionality from the action buffer or a script, why don't Tommaso just call the method, instead, from the GUI classes ? This was part of

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Abdelrazak == Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Abdelrazak What I personally dislike (I should probably say hate Abdelrazak ;-)) and what I intent to change in 1.6 is the Abdelrazak serialization used in order to retrieve information from Abdelrazak the core (the initParam() and such).

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Abdelrazak == Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Abdelrazak What I personally dislike (I should probably say hate Abdelrazak ;-)) and what I intent to change in 1.6 is the Abdelrazak serialization used in order to retrieve information from Abdelrazak the

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Abdelrazak == Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Abdelrazak We don't need XML to sanitize a the format of the passed Abdelrazak string, we could do that now using key, properties Abdelrazak requests. I mean that we will do XML in any case, and this could be merged with the

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 06:39:30PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Tommaso == Tommaso Cucinotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tommaso While this could be useful to allow activation of the Tommaso functionality from the action buffer or a script, why don't Tommaso

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Except if this serialization can be merged with the writing of the xml parameters once we switch to that. In this case, the thing would make more sense (and allow to define bindings to tune individual parameters). Is it possible to have brief description of

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On 7/10/07, Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, as a newbie of the LyX code, I'm just curious about the purpose of the FuncRequest/dispatch mechanism. Specifically, it is not clear to me why from the GUI some functions produce a formatted text string that is dispatched through a

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

> "Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tommaso> While this could be useful to allow activation of the Tommaso> functionality from the action buffer or a script, why don't Tommaso> just call the method, instead, from the GUI classes ? This was part of the

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Tommaso> While this could be useful to allow activation of the Tommaso> functionality from the action buffer or a script, why don't Tommaso> just call the method, instead, from the GUI classes ? This was

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Abdelrazak> What I personally dislike (I should probably say "hate" Abdelrazak> ;-)) and what I intent to change in 1.6 is the Abdelrazak> serialization used in order to retrieve information from Abdelrazak> the core (the

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Abdelrazak> What I personally dislike (I should probably say "hate" Abdelrazak> ;-)) and what I intent to change in 1.6 is the Abdelrazak> serialization used in order to retrieve information from

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Abdelrazak> We don't need XML to sanitize a the format of the passed Abdelrazak> string, we could do that now using Abdelrazak> requests. I mean that we will do XML in any case, and this could be merged with

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 06:39:30PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>"Tommaso" == Tommaso Cucinotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >Tommaso> While this could be useful to allow activation of the > >Tommaso> functionality from the action buffer or a script,

Re: FuncRequest/dispatch goals

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes ha scritto: Except if this serialization can be merged with the writing of the xml parameters once we switch to that. In this case, the thing would make more sense (and allow to define bindings to tune individual parameters). Is it possible to have brief description of