Martin Vermeer wrote:
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 01:42:47PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
Are these LFUNs still desirable in their present form? I have
specifically in mind LFUN_FONT_CODE and LFUN_FONT_NOUN, which have
really been replaced with logical character styles.
Hmmm yes... actually I would like to get rid of the noun and emph font
attributes altogether, and bind the toolbar buttons to charstyles
instead. I.e., make the replacement "really".
Yes. And if you essentially did the same for other sorts of font changes
that people insist upon using---LFUN_FONT_SANS, etc---then you could get
close to getting rid of the text styles dialog, with all its attendant
problems.
Providing the corresponding lyx2lyx entry is going to be "interesting".
Might not be too terribly bad. We'd have to see.
Is LFUN_FONT_CODE actually being realistically used, except as a surrogate for
typewriter?
I doubt it. Though I'm sure there's one developer who's madly in love
with it. There always seems to be. ;-)
Richard
--
==================================================================
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==================================================================
Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de
Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC
Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at:
http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
