On 05/02/2011 03:24 PM, Jim Oldfield wrote: > Hi all, > > > Now that 2.0.0 tries to guess the number of numbered equations, rather than > than > displaying (#) as 1.6.x does, should I file bugs in trac for the cases it > gets > wrong? > I'd be interested in these bugs, if only because the mechanism used here is also that used for XHTML output, when math is output as images. If you could add them to trac, I'd be grateful. (Please see that rgheck is cc'd on them.)
Richard > Sorry I didn't spot these earlier in the cycle, I normally have instant > preview > turned on (where equation numbering has always been random), so I only found > out > about the new feature from bug #7493. > > Here are the bugs that I've spotted: > > > * In report, book and maybe other classes, equations are numbered with no > suffix > ( (1), (2), ...) up until the first \chapter, after which they are numbered > per > chapter ( (1.1), (1.2), ...). In LyX they always show up with no suffix > regardless. > > * If a child document has numbered equations, then equations in the master > document do not skip at all to take this into account. The behaviour of the > equation numbers in the child document is particularly strange: every key > stroke > increments them all! > > * If the user has an explicit \tag or \tag*, then this is ignored. At the > very > least, the numbering should never skip because of an equation with an > explicit > tag in it. Better would be if the tag is displayed (and, even better, > edited!) > in place of the equation number. > > * Subequations, and thus equations after them, are not numbered correctly. > Since > subequations currently require ERT or a custom module, this is an enhancement > request rather than a bug (but has support on the user vote page). > > Jim
