On 2010-11-30, Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/30/2010 05:51 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: >> On 2010-11-29, Michal wrote:
>>> That's something I didn't know - I thought that the InPreamble >>> option works for 'Style' only. Well, I'll have to take a closer look >>> into a documentation then. Thank you for pointing it out. >> Sorry, I did not test whether InsetLayout supports InPreamble, so >> maybe it will not help in your case. > InsetLayout doesn't support InPreamble. OK. >> However, maybe it is simple to add this support - even in the beta >> phase. > This looks too confusing to me. We'd have insets, which could appear > anywhere in the document, whose sole purpose was to add things to the > preamble? To me, this is not more confusing than to have a Paragraph adding things to the preamble. > The preamble style looks to me like a hack anyway. In my view, while this is an expert feature, it might come handy for stuff that logically belongs to some text part but for technical reasons must be placed in the preamble. > The original issue was branch-specific preamble code. A better way to > implement this, it seems to > me, would be to have LyX declare a condition for each branch, based upon > the branch name, e.g.: > \newif\ly...@branchname > and then make it true or false according to whether the branch is > active. Then you can test for the > condition in your preamble code. Easy to implement via > InsetBranch::validate(). Another way, but IMO more complicated from the users point. Günter
