Am Mittwoch, den 19.04.2017, 12:43 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> LyX reserves the right to generate different output with different
> versions
> ("Änderungen die dem technischen Fortschritt dienen …").
This is new to me.
> But I agree with you, that this is no charter for arbitrary changes
>
Dear Jürgen,
On 2017-04-19, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 18.04.2017, 22:34 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
>> It is an undocumented internal. At least some developers don't bother
>> about the actual LaTeX written, so the difference between specialchar
>> and literal char went
Am Dienstag, den 18.04.2017, 22:34 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> It is an undocumented internal. At least some developers don't bother
> about
> the actual LaTeX written, so the difference between specialchar and
> literal
> char went unnoticed until now.
Note that I am not talking about the
On 2017-04-18, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 18.04.2017, 10:26 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes:
>> > Why?
>> The fact is the you rely on an undocumented behavior of LyX to
>> obtain what you want :)
> I wouldn't count it undocumented.
It is an undocumented internal. At least
Am Dienstag, den 18.04.2017, 10:26 +0200 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes:
> > Why?
>
> The fact is the you rely on an undocumented behavior of LyX to
> obtain
> what you want :)
I wouldn't count it undocumented. It is obvious that the special char
inset outputs \ldots, so I need to redefine that
Le 18/04/2017 à 07:33, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit :
Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 21:14 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
On 2017-04-17, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 09:54 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
The more important issue is commented on trac: Some people redefine
\ldots
Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 21:14 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> On 2017-04-17, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 09:54 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> > The more important issue is commented on trac: Some people redefine
> > \ldots
>
> a bad idea...
Why?
>
> > (I do in
On 2017-04-17, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 09:54 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> The more important issue is commented on trac: Some people redefine
> \ldots
a bad idea...
> (I do in all my private classes), and this will break if it will
> be substituted by \dots.
>
Am Montag, den 17.04.2017, 09:54 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> Of course I do: both, the menu entry and the keybindings were adapted
> to
> "unicode-insert 2026" (…).
The more important issue is commented on trac: Some people redefine
\ldots (I do in all my private classes), and this will break
On 2017-04-17, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: quoted-printable --]
> Am Samstag, den 15.04.2017, 19:04 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
>> b) Remove specialchar "ldots" (duplicate of u2026 HORIZONTAL
>> ELLIPSIS):
> Please no. Unless you give the unicode char the same
Am Samstag, den 15.04.2017, 19:04 + schrieb Guenter Milde:
> b) Remove specialchar "ldots" (duplicate of u2026 HORIZONTAL
> ELLIPSIS):
Please no. Unless you give the unicode char the same shortcut.
Jürgen
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
11 matches
Mail list logo
