On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 05:59:56PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > Can't we (ab)use mathed for the bullets? The validate() would come for > > How?
Don't know. I don't really know where and how the bullets are drawn... > If you want real strings all the time and to get rid of the \bullets > .lyx entries, leaving \bulletsLaTeX only, then that's a 1.4 thing IMO. I think all of this is 1.4, except for the move of tempbullets from the core... > > The missing support for \ding is a matter of ten minutes... > > Qt working the same as XForms would be less changes methinks. > It'd remove a lot of code too. Ok. So why don't do it that way for now? > I think both you and Edwin aren't realizing just what weird and > wonderful things can end up in user-modded string. If you attempt to > parse such a thing how do you decide whether to set the size field or > leave the size in the string (maybe by saying the size must be the > first thing otherwise ignore it?). I never understood why this size thing is needed. In any case, \Large etc could be parsed as any other LaTeX command, so I see no additional problem here. > If by parsing you mean you simply want to check if a bullet string > exists in the user string for validation (deciding which extra package > to include) then that would work okay but anything more complicated > than that and I think you're heading up the wrong path. No, by "parsing" I mean "throwing it at the math parser". Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
