On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 04:04:04PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj�nnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 10:24:52AM -0300, Joao Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: > >> Right, and this button already exists. [...] > > > | We have four cases: > > > | (1) validate finds AMS, user wants it > | (2) validate finds AMS, but user does not want it > > > | (3) validate does not find AMS, but user wants it > | (4) validate does not find AMS, user does not want it > > > >> The idea is that that button controls the use of AMS, and two "persons" > >> can check it: the user and validate, but only the user can uncheck it. > > > | (4) is not covered by your proposal. > > But isn't (4) then a degenerate case?
No, here Andr� is right. The problem is that validate isn't run *until the latexing phase*, at which time it is too late for user intervention. It should be possible for the user to specify *in advance* what should happen (a) if validate finds AMS; or (b) if validate does not find AMS. The three-state radio button (use AMS always/ use AMS never/ trust the validation) offers this. (And of these, "use AMS always" can be replaced by a preamble entry as it will be for experts only.) > -- > Lgb Martin
msg45089/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
