Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email adress and me not?
You do. Now you just need to learn how to use it ;-)
$ ssh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
$ cat .forward
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Angus
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I added the requisite
comment to the FORMAT file --- could you just check your name (I'm not
sure my accents are correct) and email?
The name is fine there.
Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email adress and me not?
You do. Now you just need to learn how to use it ;-)
$ ssh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
$ cat .forward
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Angus
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I added the requisite
comment to the FORMAT file --- could you just check your name (I'm not
sure my accents are correct) and email?
The name is fine there.
Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email
Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the only
difference is incrementing the format number by one, after Jurgen's
format change.
Dov Feldstern wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and
the fileformat change. It is
Dov == Dov Feldstern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dov Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the
Dov only difference is incrementing the format number by one, after
Dov Jurgen's format change.
I'll let Jose decide about whether it is good enough now, but I do not
like much
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Dov == Dov Feldstern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dov Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the
Dov only difference is incrementing the format number by one, after
Dov Jurgen's format change.
I'll let Jose decide about whether it is good enough
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I added the requisite
comment to the FORMAT file --- could you just check your name (I'm not
sure my accents are correct) and email?
The name is fine there.
Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email adress and me not?
Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the only
difference is incrementing the format number by one, after Jurgen's
format change.
Dov Feldstern wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and
the fileformat change. It is
> "Dov" == Dov Feldstern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dov> Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the
Dov> only difference is incrementing the format number by one, after
Dov> Jurgen's format change.
I'll let Jose decide about whether it is good enough now, but I do not
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Dov" == Dov Feldstern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dov> Any thoughts on this? Attached a newer version of the patch, the
Dov> only difference is incrementing the format number by one, after
Dov> Jurgen's format change.
I'll let Jose decide about whether it is good
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I added the requisite
comment to the FORMAT file --- could you just check your name (I'm not
sure my accents are correct) and email?
The name is fine there.
Btw. Why do you have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] email adress and me not?
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and the
fileformat change. It is furthermore needed to load arabtex in the
preamble when the language is arabic_arabtex, I added this to the patch.
Please test.
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and the
fileformat change. It is furthermore needed to load arabtex in the
preamble when the language is arabic_arabtex, I added this to the patch.
Please test.
Thanks for taking care of the lyx2lyx stuff! I
Dear Dov and Uwe,
ARABI is a good package for Farsi that supports BABEL. But it has some (even
many) limitations. About Arabic I believe that I am not the person who should
decides at this moment. I need more time for that one.
I would like to keep the possibility of using ArabTeX (NOT
Attached is a better patch where
everything is implemented:
- correct encoding for the fontenc
package. Mostafa tested this and
gave his OK for this issue.
This is exteremly OK.
- special quotation mark definitions
for Farsi. Mostafa tested this and
gave his OK for this issue.
This
Mostafa Vahedi schrieb:
- use the document language also for
the TOC. This is a special arabi-package
thing. Please test.
It needs more investigation. We should
find the correct point in the source
at which we could place the command
\TOCLanguage{farsi}.
I think I have found it out: It
(Again, resending because it didn't arrive the first time; sorry if you
got it twice)
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
The question is, should we really go to all this trouble? (Well, not
so much, but (a) should we separate between ArabTeX and Arabi, and (b)
should we update lyx2lyx
On Friday 22 June 2007 17:04:25 Dov Feldstern wrote:
I don't think that a format change is needed, because we're using new
languages, not changing the interpretation of existing ones. If there
are users out there who have existing documents in ArabTeX, they'll have
to replace all \lang arabic
I applied the following patch:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18858
Mostafa Vahedi schrieb:
Attached is a better patch where
everything is implemented:
- correct encoding for the fontenc
package. Mostafa tested this and
gave his OK for this issue.
This is exteremly OK.
This is
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I applied the following patch:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18858
I corrected it:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18859
Uwe
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and the fileformat change. It is
furthermore needed to load arabtex in the preamble when the language is arabic_arabtex, I added this
to the patch. Please test.
---
Dov wrote:
+arabic_arabtex arabic Arabic (ArabTeX) true
Dear Dov and Uwe,
ARABI is a good package for Farsi that supports BABEL. But it has some (even
many) limitations. About Arabic I believe that I am not the person who should
decides at this moment. I need more time for that one.
I would like to keep the possibility of using ArabTeX (NOT
> Attached is a better patch where
> everything is implemented:
> - correct encoding for the fontenc
> package. Mostafa tested this and
> gave his OK for this issue.
This is exteremly OK.
> - special quotation mark definitions
> for Farsi. Mostafa tested this and
> gave his OK for this
Mostafa Vahedi schrieb:
- use the document language also for
the TOC. This is a special arabi-package
thing. Please test.
It needs more investigation. We should
find the correct point in the source
at which we could place the command
"\TOCLanguage{farsi}".
I think I have found it out: It
(Again, resending because it didn't arrive the first time; sorry if you
got it twice)
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
The question is, should we really go to all this trouble? (Well, not
so much, but (a) should we separate between ArabTeX and Arabi, and (b)
should we update lyx2lyx
On Friday 22 June 2007 17:04:25 Dov Feldstern wrote:
> I don't think that a format change is needed, because we're using new
> languages, not changing the interpretation of existing ones. If there
> are users out there who have existing documents in ArabTeX, they'll have
> to replace all "\lang
I applied the following patch:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18858
Mostafa Vahedi schrieb:
Attached is a better patch where
everything is implemented:
- correct encoding for the fontenc
package. Mostafa tested this and
gave his OK for this issue.
This is exteremly OK.
This is
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I applied the following patch:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18858
I corrected it:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/18859
Uwe
Attached is Dov's latest patch. I added the font encoding stuff and the fileformat change. It is
furthermore needed to load arabtex in the preamble when the language is arabic_arabtex, I added this
to the patch. Please test.
---
Dov wrote:
> +arabic_arabtex arabic "Arabic (ArabTeX)" true
Attached is a better patch where everything is implemented:
- correct encoding for the fontenc package. Mostafa tested this and gave his OK
for this issue.
- special quotation mark definitions for Farsi. Mostafa tested this and gave
his OK for this issue.
- fix for bug 2929 - use \textAR and
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic. Please see the email I sent earlier
tonight for a patch which separates between arabi and arabtex. This
patch should be implemented over the arabic_arabi language.
I'll get back to you
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic documents so it is also not
used. My patch requires arabi for both languages.
To repeat
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic
documents so it is also not used. My patch requires arabi for both
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic
documents so it is also not used.
Bug 2928 is the prove for my statement. Bug 2928 occurs because the \R command is not defined. But
when ArabTeX was loaded \R would have been defined. When you load
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for
Arabic documents so it is also not used.
Bug 2928 is the prove for my statement. Bug 2928 occurs because the \R
command is not defined. But when ArabTeX was loaded \R would have been
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
So my patch can't break arabTeX as it is already not used.
Correct me when I'm wrong.
see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/88100. If you
follow the instructions there, ArabTeX works perfectly alright in LyX.
You procedure requires a lot of manual
I'm resending this message, as only about half my emails seem to be
getting through tonight. My apologies if you're receiving it twice...
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
So my patch can't break arabTeX as it is already not used.
Correct me when I'm wrong.
see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/88100. If you
follow the instructions there, ArabTeX works perfectly alright in LyX.
You procedure requires
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
To repeat myself: ArabTeX without arabi can't be used due to the
missing babel interface and
ArabTeX is not babel-based, and therefore doesn't require a babel
interface.
But LyX currenly uses babel to handle the different languages. Therefore arabi will be used when
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
To repeat myself: ArabTeX without arabi can't be used due to the
missing babel interface and
ArabTeX is not babel-based, and therefore doesn't require a babel
interface.
But LyX currenly uses babel to handle the different languages. Therefore
arabi
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
and one of them has been supported for
a long time, so suddenly switching to the other and breaking
compatibility with the traditionally supported one doesn't seem right.
As I said we never supported arabTeX directly. So we don't switch to something.
Mostafa, what is
Attached is a better patch where everything is implemented:
- correct encoding for the fontenc package. Mostafa tested this and gave his OK
for this issue.
- special quotation mark definitions for Farsi. Mostafa tested this and gave
his OK for this issue.
- fix for bug 2929 - use \textAR and
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic. Please see the email I sent earlier
tonight for a patch which separates between arabi and arabtex. This
patch should be implemented over the arabic_arabi language.
I'll get back to you
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic documents so it is also not
used. My patch requires arabi for both languages.
To repeat
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic
documents so it is also not used. My patch requires arabi for both
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for Arabic
documents so it is also not used.
Bug 2928 is the prove for my statement. Bug 2928 occurs because the \R command is not defined. But
when ArabTeX was loaded \R would have been defined. When you load
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Uwe Stöhr schrieb:
I don't understand. Currently ArabTeX is never loaded by LyX for
Arabic documents so it is also not used.
Bug 2928 is the prove for my statement. Bug 2928 occurs because the \R
command is not defined. But when ArabTeX was loaded \R would have been
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
So my patch can't break arabTeX as it is already not used.
Correct me when I'm wrong.
see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/88100. If you
follow the instructions there, ArabTeX works perfectly alright in LyX.
You procedure requires a lot of manual
I'm resending this message, as only about half my emails seem to be
getting through tonight. My apologies if you're receiving it twice...
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
I will test this now. But even if it all works, this is *not* OK as it
is --- it breaks ArabTeX Arabic.
I don't
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
So my patch can't break arabTeX as it is already not used.
Correct me when I'm wrong.
see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel/88100. If you
follow the instructions there, ArabTeX works perfectly alright in LyX.
You procedure requires
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
To repeat myself: ArabTeX without arabi can't be used due to the
missing babel interface and
ArabTeX is not babel-based, and therefore doesn't require a babel
interface.
But LyX currenly uses babel to handle the different languages. Therefore arabi will be used when
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
To repeat myself: ArabTeX without arabi can't be used due to the
missing babel interface and
ArabTeX is not babel-based, and therefore doesn't require a babel
interface.
But LyX currenly uses babel to handle the different languages. Therefore
arabi
Dov Feldstern schrieb:
and one of them has been supported for
a long time, so suddenly switching to the other and breaking
compatibility with the traditionally supported one doesn't seem right.
As I said we never supported arabTeX directly. So we don't switch to something.
Mostafa, what is
54 matches
Mail list logo
