Darren Dale wrote:
> On Thursday 02 August 2007 10:42:17 am John Hunter wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/07, Michael Droettboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know if we ever reached consensus on how to specify math text
>>> vs. regular text. I agree with Eric that it's down to two options:
>>> using a new kw argument (probably format="math" to be most future-proof)
>>> or Math('string'). I don't think I have enough "historical perspective"
>>> to really make the call but I do have a concern about the second option
>>> that it may be confusing depending on how "Math" is imported. (It may
>>> have to be pylab.Math in some instances but not in others.) But I don't
>>> have a strong objection.
>>>
>>> Any last objections to going with the new keyword argument?
>>>
>> I'm +1 on the kwarg approach -- it seems most consistent with our other
>> usage.
>>
>
> Maybe the keyword should be format="TeX"? Or texformatting=True? Maybe it
> would be appropriate to have the kwarg default to None, and if None reference
> an rcoption like text.texformatting? That might be the least disruptive all
> around.
>
I think format="TeX" may be a bit misleading, since it uses something
TeX-like, but not really TeX (as the usetex stuff does). That said, I
don't really have a better suggestion ;)
The idea also is that in the future this could support other values,
e.g. format="html" might support "<b>bold</b>" for instance, so
texformatting=True would be less extensible overall.
And yes, having a rcoption default seems like it could be handy.
Cheers,
Mike
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Matplotlib-devel mailing list
Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
