On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Amir [ugly latex suggestion]
In fact we have two choices for a better solution:
- insert this caption as a foldable inset in the section. That would
of course require
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 01:56:37PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
I'd say we should extend the Layout-Paragraph popup to include a tabbed
section for optional arguements. This idea has been discussed several
times before with various levels of
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Amir> [ugly latex suggestion]
>
> In fact we have two choices for a better solution:
>
> - insert this caption as a foldable inset in the section. That would
> of
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 01:56:37PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
>
> I'd say we should extend the Layout->Paragraph popup to include a tabbed
> section for optional arguements. This idea has been discussed several
> times before with various
- no accents
- no transliteration of special characters like ~\%
- no math formulae, no references...
This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into gui-independent
form then we can create a small buffer in any dialog (remember this was
proposed for the find/replace dialog)
"Juergen" == Juergen Vigna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- no accents - no transliteration of special characters like ~\%
- no math formulae, no references...
This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into
gui-independent form then we can create a small buffer in any
dialog
"Allan" == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into
Allan gui-independent form then we can create a small buffer in any
Allan dialog (remember this was proposed for the find/replace dialog)
Allan that will accept any LyX content. Of
>> - no accents
>> - no transliteration of special characters like &~\%
>> - no math formulae, no references...
>
> This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into gui-independent
> form then we can create a small buffer in any dialog (remember this was
> proposed for the find/replace
> "Juergen" == Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> - no accents - no transliteration of special characters like &~\%
>>> - no math formulae, no references...
>> This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into
>> gui-independent form then we can create a small buffer in
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Allan> This is true only until we get our bufferview widget into
Allan> gui-independent form then we can create a small buffer in any
Allan> dialog (remember this was proposed for the find/replace dialog)
Allan> that will accept any LyX
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 01:56:37PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
I'd say we should extend the Layout-Paragraph popup to include a tabbed
section for optional arguements. This idea has been discussed several
times before with various levels of
"Allan" == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers, just to give you an opinion about
that: a "clickable" section / subsection / chapter offering a
field for entering a "shorty" for the table of
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Allan" == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Allan complexity/generality. We'd need to define how many optional
Allan arguements there are and their form (string, int etc) and
Allan appropriate labels as well as how to actually write
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 01:56:37PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
>
> I'd say we should extend the Layout->Paragraph popup to include a tabbed
> section for optional arguements. This idea has been discussed several
> times before with various
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Allan> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
>> Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers, just to give you an opinion about
>> that: a "clickable" section / subsection / chapter offering a
>> field for entering a "shorty" for the
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Allan> complexity/generality. We'd need to define how many optional
> Allan> arguements there are and their form (string, int etc) and
> Allan> appropriate labels as well as how to
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers,
just to give you an opinion about that: a "clickable" section /
subsection / chapter offering a field for entering a "shorty" for
the table of contents sounds best to me (despite whatever changes
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Dr. Ing. Dieter Jurzitza wrote:
> Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers,
> just to give you an opinion about that: a "clickable" section /
> subsection / chapter offering a field for entering a "shorty" for
> the table of contents sounds best to me (despite whatever changes
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Amir Question for the latex gurus in the audience. One popular
Amir complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
Amir \section[short]{long section title}.
Amir Well, perhaps this has been discussed before, but couldn't you
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
I'm sure there should be some adjustments to this scheme to make it
reasonably general. In particular, we should use the same scheme for
both LaTeX and SGML. So maybe
"Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jose Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
Jose this solution should be more general than just for title.
The solution I have in mind would work for sections and captions. What
we have to know is what
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 06:13:45PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jose Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
Jose this solution should be more general than just for title.
The solution I have
Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers,
just to give you an opinion about that: a "clickable" section / subsection /
chapter offering a field for entering a "shorty" for the table of contents
sounds best to me (despite whatever changes ought to occur in the LyX code).
I think this is easy to keep
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amir> Question for the latex gurus in the audience. One popular
Amir> complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
Amir> \section[short]{long section title}.
Amir> Well, perhaps this has been discussed before, but
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
[...]
> I'm sure there should be some adjustments to this scheme to make it
> reasonably general. In particular, we should use the same scheme for
> both LaTeX and
> "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jose> Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
Jose> this solution should be more general than just for title.
The solution I have in mind would work for sections and captions. What
we have to know
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 06:13:45PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Jose> Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
> Jose> this solution should be more general than just for title.
>
> The
Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers,
just to give you an opinion about that: a "clickable" section / subsection /
chapter offering a field for entering a "shorty" for the table of contents
sounds best to me (despite whatever changes ought to occur in the LyX code).
I think this is easy to keep
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Amir Karger wrote:
Question for the latex gurus in the audience.
One popular complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
\section[short]{long section title}.
[...]
Hi Amir,
I posted exactly the same trick some months ago to get short caption
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Amir Karger wrote:
> Question for the latex gurus in the audience.
>
> One popular complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
> \section[short]{long section title}.
> [...]
Hi Amir,
I posted exactly the same trick some months ago to get short caption
Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since this doesn't require changing LyX code, I would contend that it won't
break anything. I'm probably wrong. But please tell me why.
I haven't checked the source nor, even tested it myself, but
Does your suggestion work with \fragile commands? I.e.,
Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since this doesn't require changing LyX code, I would contend that it won't
> break anything. I'm probably wrong. But please tell me why.
I haven't checked the source nor, even tested it myself, but
Does your suggestion work with \fragile commands?
Question for the latex gurus in the audience.
One popular complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
\section[short]{long section title}.
Well, perhaps this has been discussed before, but couldn't you do something
like this in the preamble (I don't know TeX, so this is sort
Question for the latex gurus in the audience.
One popular complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
\section[short]{long section title}.
Well, perhaps this has been discussed before, but couldn't you do something
like this in the preamble (I don't know TeX, so this is sort
34 matches
Mail list logo
