Re: Rename 666 to TEX
admitting that LyX can't do it all and providing some way of getting under the hood. I always felt that the whole EvilRedText thing was just an apeasement of the M$ Word crowd, anyhow. Still, Raw or PassThru seems fine by me. Go for 'Raw'. This way we would spare us a flame war on the correct spelling of 'PassThrough' ;-^H^H oh... it's Friday again... Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Andre Poenitz wrote: Let's just keep it as it is now: ERT Encapsulated Raw Text Okokok... I thought you are the math guru, why don't you write $ok^3\ldot$ i see, the problem is the first uppercase letter ... Herbert :-) -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:36:10AM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote:
Andre Poenitz wrote:
Let's just keep it as it is now: ERT Encapsulated Raw Text
Okokok...
I thought you are the math guru, why don't you write
$ok^3\ldot$
I'm not defending André, after all he doesn't need it, but even so I
should point some incoherence in your post Herbert...
i see, the problem is the first uppercase letter ...
Herbert :-)
So you are using those punny icons in a Friday, and I thought that you
oh sorry, but I have 45 holidays, 29 in front of me ...
so I don't know what day of weekend is, because it's
absolutely not important for me
$ \stackrel{.\, .}{\stackrel{|}{\smile }} $
well done!
BTW using docbook/xml I would write #x263A; just before you ask
or \smiley with package wasysym and
\Huge\smiley is just the same size than yours.
nice weekend
Herbert
--
http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
> admitting that LyX can't do it all and providing some way of getting > under the hood. I always felt that the whole "EvilRedText" thing was > just an apeasement of the M$ Word crowd, anyhow. > > Still, "Raw" or "PassThru" seems fine by me. Go for 'Raw'. This way we would spare us a flame war on the correct spelling of 'PassThrough' ;-^H^H oh... it's Friday again... Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > Let's just keep it as it is now: "ERT" Encapsulated Raw Text > > Okokok... I thought you are the math guru, why don't you write $ok^3\ldot$ i see, the problem is the first uppercase letter ... Herbert :-) -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 11:36:10AM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote:
> > Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > >
> > > > Let's just keep it as it is now: "ERT" Encapsulated Raw Text
> > >
> > > Okokok...
> >
> > I thought you are the math guru, why don't you write
> >
> > $ok^3\ldot$
>
> I'm not defending André, after all he doesn't need it, but even so I
> should point some incoherence in your post Herbert...
>
> > i see, the problem is the first uppercase letter ...
> >
> > Herbert :-)
> """
> So you are using those punny icons in a Friday, and I thought that you
oh sorry, but I have 45 holidays, 29 in front of me ...
so I don't know what day of weekend is, because it's
absolutely not important for me
$ \stackrel{.\, .}{\stackrel{|}{\smile }} $
well done!
> BTW using docbook/xml I would write just before you ask
or \smiley with package wasysym and
\Huge\smiley is just the same size than yours.
nice weekend
Herbert
--
http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On 29-Jul-2001 Garst R. Reese wrote: TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Oh you have the same problems there, people seeing Harry Potter as a really evil book ;), I discovered recently that in some villages it was banned from the public library because of (some) parents complains! Jürgen -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253 I-39100 Bozen Web: http://www.sad.it/~jug -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Never reveal your best argument.
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:41:35PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: The TeX inset on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. In a DocBook document TeX won't make much sense. Whoa. Never thought of that. In my mind, the LyX backend is always LaTeX. On the other hand Raw may make more sense when used in both LaTeX and DocBook documents. Probably a good description. You could also just call it a Markup inset since LaTeX and DocBook are markup languages. To me, though, markup seems like it's even more marked up than LyX, not more raw. I'd go with raw. -Amir
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:27:06PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | To me, though, markup seems like it's even more marked up than LyX, not more | raw. I'd go with raw. I still think '666' gives the right assosiations. Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. (but I won't argue is was a Bolzano change...) If you're not arguing, then let's change the name to the Raw inset. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
| Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. eh? '666'? what do _you_ think/assosiate when you see 666? Actually, knowledge about the deeper meaning of '666' seems not to be too widespread among all the supporters of a few 'other' religions and the atheist... I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better name of that beast. Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
| I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better | name of that beast. pun intended? Sure... puns are not frowned upon hereabout... Why not just rename the inset label to The Beast For exactly the same raeson. _I_ would not know what 'The Beast' is in connection with LyX. I guess some time ago I'd have expected the LyX mascot in the inset... Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 04:31:28PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better | name of that beast. pun intended? Why not just rename the inset label to The Beast the wickedest inset in the world john -- I'd rather be rudely informed than politely left in the dark.
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Mike Ressler wrote: On 30 Jul 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lars Or just change the ERT acronym to be something else. Eloquent Lars Red Text, Encumbering Red Text, Extension Red Text... Encapsulated Raw Text? :-) A most excellent example of coming up with the full title after the acronym was chosen! (Standard operating procedure at NASA ...) Mike My favourite was Destination: IRAN - Destination: Inspect and Replace As Necessary Garst
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Garst R. Reese wrote: Mike Ressler wrote: On 30 Jul 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Lars == Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lars Or just change the ERT acronym to be something else. Eloquent Lars Red Text, Encumbering Red Text, Extension Red Text... Encapsulated Raw Text? :-) A most excellent example of coming up with the full title after the acronym was chosen! (Standard operating procedure at NASA ...) Mike My favourite was Destination: IRAN - Destination: Inspect and Replace As Necessary ert seems to be the biggest problem which lyx ever had ... ;-) Herbert -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
* Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2001-07-30 16:26] schrieb: | Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. eh? '666'? what do _you_ think/assosiate when you see 666? i only think hä, was is los? or for non germans what? what's going on here? (hoping htat not only kayvan had the right to answer ;) Actually, knowledge about the deeper meaning of '666' seems not to be too widespread among all the supporters of a few 'other' religions and the atheist... I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better name of that beast. can you explain it once more? either i have missed it or it was never explained in the list (and i dont read harry potter and won't do in near future, it seems to be related) Andre' -- thanks ronny
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Amazingly it seems like we have reached a kind of consensus that ERT is better than 666, and this within two days! What the fuck? I had expected this thread to continue for weeks!?! Normally trivial details take forever to settle because everybody has an opinion. Hmm. I have to practice that mind reading business some more. Now, who would have the honors of making this Very Important Change that will surely mark a completely new era of the Beast called LyX? You have until Wednesday if you want to forego I. Greets, Asger
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 11:36:49PM +0200, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: Amazingly it seems like we have reached a kind of consensus that ERT is better than 666, and this within two days! What the fuck? I had expected this thread to continue for weeks!?! Normally trivial details take forever to settle because everybody has an opinion. Hmm. I have to practice that mind reading business some more. I think it was the brain-fart from Lars(?) who proposed re-defining the ERT acronym to mean Embedded Raw Text. Now, who would have the honors of making this Very Important Change that will surely mark a completely new era of the Beast called LyX? *laugh* -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On 29-Jul-2001 Garst R. Reese wrote: >> TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. > It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban > Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Oh you have the same problems there, people seeing "Harry Potter" as a really evil book ;), I discovered recently that in some villages it was banned from the public library because of (some) parents complains! Jürgen -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253 I-39100 Bozen Web: http://www.sad.it/~jug -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Never reveal your best argument.
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:41:35PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: > > > The "TeX inset" on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. > > In a DocBook document "TeX" won't make much sense. Whoa. Never thought of that. In my mind, the LyX backend is always LaTeX. > On the other hand "Raw" may make more sense when used in both LaTeX and > DocBook documents. Probably a good description. > You could also just call it a "Markup" inset since > LaTeX and DocBook are markup languages. To me, though, markup seems like it's even more marked up than LyX, not more raw. I'd go with raw. -Amir
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 03:27:06PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | To me, though, markup seems like it's even more marked up than LyX, not more > | raw. I'd go with raw. > > I still think '666' gives the right assosiations. Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. > (but I won't argue is was a Bolzano change...) If you're not arguing, then let's change the name to the Raw inset. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
> | Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. > > eh? '666'? > > what do _you_ think/assosiate when you see "666"? Actually, knowledge about the deeper meaning of '666' seems not to be too widespread among all the supporters of a few 'other' religions and the atheist... I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better name of that beast. Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
> | I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better > | name of that beast. > > pun intended? Sure... puns are not frowned upon hereabout... > Why not just rename the inset label to "The Beast" For exactly the same raeson. _I_ would not know what 'The Beast' is in connection with LyX. I guess some time ago I'd have expected the LyX mascot in the inset... Andre' -- André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 04:31:28PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better > | name of that beast. > > pun intended? > > Why not just rename the inset label to "The Beast" "the wickedest inset in the world" john -- "I'd rather be rudely informed than politely left in the dark."
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Mike Ressler wrote: > > On 30 Jul 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Lars> Or just change the "ERT" acronym to be something else. Eloquent > > Lars> Red Text, Encumbering Red Text, Extension Red Text... > > > > Encapsulated Raw Text? > > :-) A most excellent example of coming up with the full title after the > acronym was chosen! (Standard operating procedure at NASA ...) > > Mike My favourite was "Destination: IRAN" -> "Destination: Inspect and Replace As Necessary" Garst
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
"Garst R. Reese" wrote: > > Mike Ressler wrote: > > > > On 30 Jul 2001, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > > "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > Lars> Or just change the "ERT" acronym to be something else. Eloquent > > > Lars> Red Text, Encumbering Red Text, Extension Red Text... > > > > > > Encapsulated Raw Text? > > > > :-) A most excellent example of coming up with the full title after the > > acronym was chosen! (Standard operating procedure at NASA ...) > > > > Mike > My favourite was "Destination: IRAN" -> "Destination: Inspect and > Replace As Necessary" "ert" seems to be the biggest problem which lyx ever had ... ;-) Herbert -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
* Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2001-07-30 16:26] schrieb: > > | Only to those people who know all the various in-jokes and references. > > > > eh? '666'? > > > > what do _you_ think/assosiate when you see "666"? > i only think "hä, was is los?" or for non germans "what? what's going on here?" (hoping htat not only kayvan had the right to answer ;) > Actually, knowledge about the deeper meaning of '666' seems not to be too > widespread among all the supporters of a few 'other' religions and the > atheist... > > I had to explain '666' more than once and I do think 'Raw' is a much better > name of that beast. can you explain it once more? either i have missed it or it was never explained in the list (and i dont read harry potter and won't do in near future, it seems to be related) > > Andre' > -- thanks ronny
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Amazingly it seems like we have reached a kind of consensus that ERT is better than 666, and this within two days! What the fuck? I had expected this thread to continue for weeks!?! Normally trivial details take forever to settle because everybody has an opinion. Hmm. I have to practice that mind reading business some more. Now, who would have the honors of making this Very Important Change that will surely mark a completely new era of the Beast called LyX? You have until Wednesday if you want to forego I. Greets, Asger
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 11:36:49PM +0200, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > Amazingly it seems like we have reached a kind of consensus that ERT is > better than 666, and this within two days! What the fuck? I had expected this > thread to continue for weeks!?! Normally trivial details take forever to > settle because everybody has an opinion. Hmm. I have to practice that mind > reading business some more. I think it was the brain-fart from Lars(?) who proposed re-defining the ERT acronym to mean Embedded Raw Text. > Now, who would have the honors of making this Very Important Change that > will surely mark a completely new era of the Beast called LyX? *laugh* -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 02:32:00PM +0200, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: Hi, The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? Greets, Asger I totally agree. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. HErbert -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Herbert Voss wrote: Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Garst
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: Herbert Voss wrote: Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Funny, but Im going to have to agree with the others. If someone does happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it does. -Amir
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:14:41PM -0400, Amir Karger wrote: On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: Herbert Voss wrote: Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Funny, but Im going to have to agree with the others. If someone does happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it does. Yes, the name of program features should be primarily influenced by clarity and intuitiveness. Whie 666 inset is clever and it makes sense within the sub-culture of people who know that ERT means Evil Red Text which is a reference to TeX mode, it fails on both clarity and intuitiveness. Too many in-jokes and obscure references. The TeX inset on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:14:41PM -0400, Amir Karger wrote: On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: Herbert Voss wrote: Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Interesting publicity opportunity... Funny, but Im going to have to agree with the others. If someone does happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it does. Yes, the name of program features should be primarily influenced by clarity and intuitiveness. Whie 666 inset is clever and it makes sense within the sub-culture of people who know that ERT means Evil Red Text which is a reference to TeX mode, it fails on both clarity and intuitiveness. Too many in-jokes and obscure references. The TeX inset on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. In a DocBook document TeX won't make much sense. On the other hand Raw may make more sense when used in both LaTeX and DocBook documents. You could also just call it a Markup inset since LaTeX and DocBook are markup languages. Allan. (ARRae)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 02:32:00PM +0200, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > Hi, > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? > > Greets, > > Asger I totally agree. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
"Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote: > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. HErbert -- http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/~voss/lyx/
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
Herbert Voss wrote: > > "Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote: > > > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? > > TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Garst
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: > Herbert Voss wrote: > > > > "Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote: > > > > > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > > > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > > > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? > > > > TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. > It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban > Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Funny, but I"m going to have to agree with the others. If someone does happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it does. -Amir
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:14:41PM -0400, Amir Karger wrote: > On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: > > Herbert Voss wrote: > > > > > > "Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote: > > > > > > > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > > > > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > > > > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? > > > > > > TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. > > It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban > > Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) > > Funny, but I"m going to have to agree with the others. If someone does > happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it > does. Yes, the name of program features should be primarily influenced by clarity and intuitiveness. Whie "666 inset" is clever and it makes sense within the sub-culture of people who know that ERT means Evil Red Text which is a reference to TeX mode, it fails on both clarity and intuitiveness. Too many in-jokes and obscure references. The "TeX inset" on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Rename 666 to TEX
On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: > On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:14:41PM -0400, Amir Karger wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote: > > > Herbert Voss wrote: > > > > > > > > "Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about > > > > > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which > > > > > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established? > > > > > > > > TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text. > > > It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban > > > Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :) Interesting publicity opportunity... > > Funny, but I"m going to have to agree with the others. If someone does > > happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it > > does. > > Yes, the name of program features should be primarily influenced by > clarity and intuitiveness. > > Whie "666 inset" is clever and it makes sense within the sub-culture of > people who know that ERT means Evil Red Text which is a reference to TeX > mode, it fails on both clarity and intuitiveness. Too many in-jokes > and obscure references. > > The "TeX inset" on the other hand, is clear and intuitive. In a DocBook document "TeX" won't make much sense. On the other hand "Raw" may make more sense when used in both LaTeX and DocBook documents. You could also just call it a "Markup" inset since LaTeX and DocBook are markup languages. Allan. (ARRae)
