On 05/08/2014 09:52 PM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Julio Rojas <jcredbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
BTW, now I understand what Jurgen meant by "no need" to indent the paragraph
after a frame title for the text to remain within the "Frame". I thought
that by saying it was a "Frame" environment, the text would not behave as a
standard indented standard environment. My mistake. Nevertheless,
indentation gives a clear idea that this text belongs to this "Frame".
Anyways, as I continuously use "Theorems" (and derivatives), I usually found
myself indenting these environments into a "Frame", so indenting standard
text is kind of a natural extension for me.
Thanks for the hard work dudes. I will go back to my never-ending stream of
Beamer slides...
I had been waiting until the end of my semester, and also waiting for
debian testing to go to 2.1, to upgrade. But I saw that debian was not
upgrading until they find a new maintainer (more than I have the time
for), and classes are done, so I compiled 2.1 today. I looked at the
Beamer changes first, since that would likely be the most difficult.
I was pleased to see that my old (fairly simple) Beamer files imported
automatically. I see now the issues with the frames. It could be
easier to navigate between depths and environments, and it will catch me
now and again to remember to separate Frame environments, but it isn't
too awkward for now. I guess the question is whether to treat the
beginning of a Frame similarly to the treatment of a Section, or to
treat it more like a Theorem or quotation environment. Following LaTeX
treatment is probably best in the long run. Getting out of such an
environment could be easier. Why does a plain frame have space for a title?
--
David L. Johnson
Department of Mathematics
Lehigh University
