Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: I assumed this and I answered accordingly (as if you had written literal and not literate). My argument, however, is that we may cosider it more useful to encode unencodable characters into a LICR instead of throwing an error, as for LaTeX this is one representation of

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: > I assumed this and I answered accordingly (as if you had written literal > and not literate). > > My argument, however, is that we may cosider it more useful to encode > "unencodable" characters into a LICR instead of throwing an error, as for > LaTeX this is one

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Le 06/07/2015 17:17, Richard Heck a écrit : I'm slightly confused. Is the idea that this inset can go anywhere you like in the document, but its contents end up in the premable? If not, then why do we need insets to do this? Why not just have some sort of paragraph layout that does this? of

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Am Montag 06 Juli 2015, 17:24:47 schrieb Guenter Milde: On 2015-07-05, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols replacements for the

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-07-05, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols replacements for the user preamble? I consider the preamble to be literate,

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 07/05/2015 10:46 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote: On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the preamble, there is no way to make a LyX-only comment. :-( If we implemented InPreamble for insets, then one could create an

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 07/05/2015 10:46 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the preamble, there is no way to make a "LyX-only" comment. :-( If we implemented InPreamble for insets, then one could

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Le 06/07/2015 17:17, Richard Heck a écrit : I'm slightly confused. Is the idea that this inset can go anywhere you like in the document, but its contents end up in the premable? If not, then why do we need insets to do this? Why not just have some sort of paragraph layout that does this? of

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-07-05, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: >> The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody >> know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols replacements for the user >> preamble? > I consider the preamble to be

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Am Montag 06 Juli 2015, 17:24:47 schrieb Guenter Milde: > On 2015-07-05, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > > Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: > >> The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody > >> know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols replacements for the user preamble? I consider the preamble to be literate, just like ERT is. Thus, I think no

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the code is about. In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. Fine. In the preamble, there is no way to make a LyX-only comment. :-( You have a point. Unfortunately we

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 05/07/2015 14:12, Georg Baum a écrit : Guenter Milde wrote: I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the code is about. In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. Fine. In the preamble,

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Le 05/07/2015 14:12, Georg Baum a écrit : Guenter Milde wrote: I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the code is about. In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. Fine. In the preamble, there is no way to make a LyX-only comment.

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote: On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the preamble, there is no way to make a LyX-only comment. :-( If we implemented InPreamble for insets, then one could create an ERT-like inset that goes in preamble. This

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: > I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the > code is about. > > In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. > Fine. > > In the preamble, there is no way to make a "LyX-only" comment. :-( You have a point.

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Am Sonntag 05 Juli 2015, 14:12:55 schrieb Georg Baum: > The attached patch fixes that and even simplifies the code. Does anybody > know of any reason _not_ to use unicodesymbols replacements for the user > preamble? I consider the preamble to be "literate", just like ERT is. Thus, I think no

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Le 05/07/2015 14:12, Georg Baum a écrit : Guenter Milde wrote: I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the code is about. In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. Fine. In the preamble, there is no way to make a "LyX-only" comment.

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 05/07/2015 14:12, Georg Baum a écrit : >> Guenter Milde wrote: >>> I want a concise comment in the LyX file, in order to explain what the >>> code is about. >>> In the document, I have the option to change the comment into a LyX-note. >>> Fine.

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2015-07-05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the preamble, there is no way to make a "LyX-only" comment. :-( > >> If we implemented InPreamble for insets, then one could create an >> ERT-like inset that goes in

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-06-30, Georg Baum wrote: Guenter Milde wrote: On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net: Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains invalid glyphs

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-06-30, Georg Baum wrote: > Guenter Milde wrote: >> On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: >>> 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde : Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. >>> It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

2015-06-29 13:26 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net: Similarily, all text parts in a comment are uncritical if the file is processed by TeX, because comments are not decoded at all. But LyX cannot convert this to the target encoding and thus fails. Silently removing the glyphs without

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

2015-06-29 13:26 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde : > Similarily, all text parts in a comment are uncritical if the file is > processed by TeX, because comments are not decoded at all. > But LyX cannot convert this to the target encoding and thus fails. Silently removing the glyphs

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net: Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains invalid glyphs (no matter if this line is processed by LaTeX or not).

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net: Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains invalid glyphs (no matter if this line is

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde : >> Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. > It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains invalid glyphs > (no matter if this line is processed by LaTeX or

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2015-06-26, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: >> 2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde : > >>> Please don't check for unencodable characters in comments. > >> It's still invalid encoding, since the output file contains invalid >> glyphs (no matter if

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net: Dear LyX developers, trying the testfile for the comma-accent feature, I came across an annoyance: With every compilation attempt, a pop up window tells me, that there are unencodable characters in the preamble. However,

Re: false positive in test for unencodable preamble

2015-06-26 16:44 GMT+02:00 Guenter Milde : > Dear LyX developers, > > trying the testfile for the comma-accent feature, I came across an > annoyance: > > With every compilation attempt, a pop up window tells me, that there > are unencodable characters in the preamble. > >