> Regarding epsilon and varepsilon:
> May I suggest that we map both varepsilon and epsilon to
> varepsilon? This is only a problem when you want to use
> both variants in a document, and that is in my experience
> very seldom, so the mayority of users will be happier.
You are probably right with both assumptions. However, the result is a
hack *and* not what a 'native' LaTeX speaker would expect. I'd rather
admit a shortcoming than to hack around. Some day we might be able to
display arbitrary bitmaps in any place.
> It's much nicer to see something that looks almost right on the
> screen, rather than ERT.
It depends. Believe it or not, I ran exactly in that problem last week.
My girl friend (I converted her... well... 50% at least ;-))
was puzzled "Why do I get a \epsilon in the printout when I type \varepsilon?"
She was *not* astonished to get ERT 'varepsilon' but that the
printout does not match.
Of course I told her "It's a special case, just type \epsilon and you'll
get a \varepsilon on screen and print out" and of course it worked.
But I really hate to explain 'special cases' aka 'features' aka 'bugs' ;-|
> Personally, I always use varepsilon, and it always annoyed
> me that LyX didn't display it ;-)
What's wrong then with the 'clean solution'? You type a \varepsilon,
you see a \varepsilon, you get a \varepsilon?
Regards,
Andre'
--
Andre' Poenitz ...................... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
