As shown below, our use of the term "Unavailable" to mark classes missing prerequisites can be confusing to people, and I'm sympathetic. These classes can be used, and marking them as "unavailable" makes it seem as if they can't be. I am also not sure that we should list all the "unavailable" classes separately at the end. That makes them harder to find, in a way.
One idea is to mark such classes with an asterisk, as in the attached patch and screenshot. Comments? Other ideas?
Richard
one change that LyX developers might consider is to issue a warning message and make the document class available to the user even if the classes in square brackets are not installed.I thought we did that already...The problem here may be what you see in the dropdown box, e.g.: Unavailable: article (REVTeX)That makes it look as if you can't use it, because it is "Unavailable". But I'm not sure what a better term would be. There are improvements in 2.0, too. If you select such a class, then LyX will tell you precisely what prerequisites are not satisfied.Maybe "limited availability" or even "lacks some packages" would be more on point than "Unavailable". What threw me was the fact that the unavailable classes are listed separately. Personally, I'd prefer colors or font shapes and weights: green (bold) = ready to go, yellow (plain text) = lacking some packages, and red (italic) = cannot process.
<<attachment: lyx.png>>
