On 13 Feb 2002, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
Allan to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although I'm not
Allan particularly concerned about this.
It should not be too
Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan On 13 Feb 2002, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
Allan to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although I'm not
Allan
On 13 Feb 2002, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Allan> If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
> Allan> to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although I'm not
> Allan> particularly concerned about this.
>
> It
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Allan> On 13 Feb 2002, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> > "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
Allan> If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
Allan> to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although
Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Allan If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
Allan to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although I'm not
Allan particularly concerned about this.
It should not be too difficult now that mathed has added support for
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:59:25PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
No I don't think we've ever done that -- maybe you are thinking of
KLyX? Why would it be cool?
Hmmm, I think visually showing the depth -- in addition to actually
showing the depth
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
Okay, another try.
See attachment.
Only works for 1aAiI labels, unfortunately. My TeX skills are not up
to more.
Martin
--
Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Helsinki University of Technology
Department of Surveying
P.O. Box
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 07:05:16PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
Okay, another try.
See attachment.
Only works for 1aAiI labels, unfortunately. My TeX skills are not up
to more.
Martin
OK, so I couldn't give up.
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Allan> If we got really really keen it would then be a simple matter
Allan> to display the chosen bullet in the buffer. Although I'm not
Allan> particularly concerned about this.
It should not be too difficult now that mathed has added
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:59:25PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> No I don't think we've ever done that -- maybe you are thinking of
> KLyX? Why would it be cool?
Hmmm, I think visually showing the depth -- in addition to actually
showing the depth
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
Okay, another try.
See attachment.
Only works for 1aAiI labels, unfortunately. My TeX skills are not up
to more.
Martin
--
Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Helsinki University of Technology
Department of Surveying
P.O. Box
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 07:05:16PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 06:50:30PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
> Okay, another try.
>
> See attachment.
>
> Only works for 1aAiI labels, unfortunately. My TeX skills are not up
> to more.
>
> Martin
OK, so I couldn't
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
[...]
I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
to define what they really look like. Are they numeric (roman, Roman,
arabic or whatever the fourth
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
[...]
I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
to define what they really look like. Are they
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:37:34PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
[...]
I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
[...]
Hmmm, now it's my turn to say that I find that secondary. I can live
with roman numerals being depicted as decimal ones, as long as they are
seen to count. Which visualises the sectioning structure.
Perhaps but if we want to support enumerate
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> [...]
> > I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
>
> Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
> to define what they really look like. Are they numeric (roman, Roman,
> arabic or whatever the
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > > I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
> >
> > Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
> > to define what they really look like.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:37:34PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:17:21PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote:
> >
> > > [...]
> > > > I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
> > >
> > > Something we have needed for a long
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
[...]
> Hmmm, now it's my turn to say that I find that secondary. I can live
> with roman numerals being depicted as decimal ones, as long as they are
> seen to count. Which visualises the sectioning structure.
Perhaps but if we want to support
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
[...]
I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
to define what they really look like. Are they numeric (roman, Roman,
arabic or whatever the fourth LaTeX type of number
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Martin Vermeer wrote:
[...]
> I have been wondering too about table/fig numbers...
Something we have needed for a long time wrt counters is the ability
to define what they really look like. Are they numeric (roman, Roman,
arabic or whatever the fourth LaTeX type of number
Hi,
The captions of figures and tables have a hash (#) instead
of the a number, e.g. Figure #: and Table #:.
However, when I look at Navigate-Figure or Navigate-Table,
the figures and tables do have numbers internally.
Why are these same numbers not used inside the LyX document?
After all,
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, R. Lahaye wrote:
After all, for example, sections are also numbered (and renumbered
when necessary); so why not doing the same for figures and
tables?
I don't know. I think it might be because it's easiest to implement the
# character. One argument to keep the hash is
Hi,
The captions of figures and tables have a hash ("#") instead
of the a number, e.g. "Figure #:" and "Table #:".
However, when I look at Navigate->Figure or Navigate->Table,
the figures and tables do have numbers internally.
Why are these same numbers not used inside the LyX document?
After
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, R. Lahaye wrote:
> After all, for example, sections are also numbered (and renumbered
> when necessary); so why not doing the same for figures and
> tables?
I don't know. I think it might be because it's easiest to implement the
# character. One argument to keep the hash is
26 matches
Mail list logo
