On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:39:25PM +0000, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2017-02-27, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:18:50PM +0000, Guenter Milde wrote: > >> On 2017-02-27, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > >> >> >> Then, a decision has to still be taken as regards the original > >> >> >> problem > >> >> >> in this thread. I think that the patch Günther proposed on Jan. 25 is > >> >> >> the less controversial one. > > >> >> > I think you mean > >> >> > https://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg198620.html > > >> >> However, this patch is obsolete. As Guillaume pointed out, there are use > >> >> cases for the dashes with and without line break opportunity. (See also > >> >> the attachments to https://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/10543) > > >> > A patch that does not exist cannot obsolete anything ;) > > >> But it can be obsolete. Obsoleted by new findings during testing and > >> discussion of the problem. > > > This is a sophism. > > Can you explain this, please?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sophism > >> > At this point we have two simple alternatives. Either the above one or > >> > https://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org/msg198615.html > > >> Both have serious drawbacks. See #10543. > > > TL;DR > > Sorry, but forcing a simple but insufficient patch to a complex problem > because the description is too long is not the right thing. You make it complex. We output latex and thus should follow latex rules. Since ever LyX was outputting -- and --- and nobody was complaining (I am not speaking about text or html output, which are different). Now LyX outputs \textendash and \textemdash and this is causing problems. What is the conclusion? -- Enrico
