Re: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[rgheck]

On 11/20/2009 05:21 PM, Guenter Milde wrote:

On 2009-11-20, Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
   

... that's because you'll have to tell the lyx2lyx script that you want
the 1.6.x file format. It would be wrong to save the documents in 1.6.x
format by default (losing new features on the road).
 

However, you can replace the LyX 1.6 version of lyx2lyx with the SVN
version and it will automatically downgrade the file format if you open
it in LyX.

Not utterly save (make a backup of the old version) but very convenient.

   

I was about to make the same suggestion.

Note that the svn version of lyx2lyx should be identical to the 1.6 
version so far as the import of older documents is concerned. The only 
differences should lie in what is newer. Of course "should" does not 
mean "is", but a quick diff shows that is more or less true. So it is 
pretty safe.


Richard

Re: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Guenter Milde]

On 2009-11-20, Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
>>> >I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather the lyx2lyx 
>>> >converter that deals with it) is still unable to revert back to 
>>> >previous versions' file formats.

>>> What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file

>>> format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new 
>>> fileformat.

>>> Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ? 

This saves the file as *.lyx16, which will not be found by the
File>Open with the standard (*.lyx) filter!

(I still long for the implementation of a filename selector with
File>Export.)


> ... that's because you'll have to tell the lyx2lyx script that you want
> the 1.6.x file format. It would be wrong to save the documents in 1.6.x
> format by default (losing new features on the road).

However, you can replace the LyX 1.6 version of lyx2lyx with the SVN
version and it will automatically downgrade the file format if you open
it in LyX.

Not utterly save (make a backup of the old version) but very convenient.

Günter

RE: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW]

>> >I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather the lyx2lyx 
>> >converter that deals with it) is still unable to revert back to 
>> >previous versions' file formats.
>>
>> What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file

>> format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new 
>> fileformat.
>>
>> Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ?
>>
>
>I did---at the time---and it did not work as advertised.
>So there was no way I could  stop using Lyx 2.0 at a later
>point.

If it doesn't work, that's a serious bug and we would like to hear it so
we can fix it. At all times, trunk should be able to export to the older
fileformats.

Vincent

RE: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW]

>> >I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather the lyx2lyx 
>> >converter that deals with it) is still unable to revert back to 
>> >previous versions' file formats.
>> 
>> What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file

>> format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new 
>> fileformat.
>> 
>> Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ? 
>> 
>> Vincent
>
>Hi Vince,
>
>I was aware that newer versions of LyX use a different file
>format.  I meant only that you have to manually export the
>document to an older version of LyX.  The lyx2lyx script is
>not capable of doing so on its own.
>

No, that's because you'll have to tell the lyx2lyx script that you want
the 1.6.x file format. It would be wrong to save the documents in 1.6.x
format by default (losing new features on the road).


Vincent

Re: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[stefano franchi]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW <
v.f.vanraveste...@tudelft.nl> wrote:

> >I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather
> >the lyx2lyx converter that deals with it) is still
> >unable to revert back to previous versions' file formats.
>
> What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file
> format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new
> fileformat.
>
> Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ?
>

I did---at the time---and it did not work as advertised. So there was no way
I could  stop using Lyx 2.0 at a later point. If that's no longer the case,
I'll give it another try. Like Rob, I have been longing for those red
squiggles for a long time...

S.






>
> Vincent
>



-- 
__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy   Ph:   (1) 979 862-2211
Texas A&M University Fax: (1) 979 845-0458
College Station, Texas, USA

RE: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Rob Oakes]

Hi Vince,

I was aware that newer versions of LyX use a different file format.  I
meant only that you have to manually export the document to an older
version of LyX.  The lyx2lyx script is not capable of doing so on its
own.

My fault for not being clear.

Cheers,

Rob

On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 21:33 +0100, Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
> >I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather
> >the lyx2lyx converter that deals with it) is still
> >unable to revert back to previous versions' file formats. 
> 
> What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file
> format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new
> fileformat.
> 
> Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ? 
> 
> Vincent

RE: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW]

>I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather
>the lyx2lyx converter that deals with it) is still
>unable to revert back to previous versions' file formats. 

What do you mean by unable to revert back ? LyX trunk uses a new file
format (of course) and the older LyXes don't know about the new
fileformat.

Did you try File->Export->LyX 1.6.x ? 

Vincent

Re: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[Rob Oakes]

I updated to the svn trunk version this morning and I can verify that
any file modified by the new version, indeed, cannot be reverted be read
by v1.6 or earlier.  When I was playing with the svn version back in
August, this would have been an enormous problem since it seemed
extremely unstable.

It appears that the developers have since fixed a number of those
problems, though.  I've been using it all morning to work on the text
for my book without a single hiccup.  (After I figured out that I needed
to specify a different -sysdir and -userdir or it would completely crap
over my previous installation).  I also fumbled around looking for the
xetex settings, but once I got it figured out (it's under
Document->Settings->Output for anyone else who might find themselves
confused), I've been a very happy camper.

The one feature that I would like to try out and can't seem to enable is
the new spell checker.  Squiggly red underlines is something that I've
wanted to see in LyX for a very long time.

Cheers,

Rob

On Fri, 2009-11-20 at 13:56 -0600, stefano franchi wrote:
> Richard,
> 
>  I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather the lyx2lyx
> converter that deals with it) is still unable to revert back to previous
> versions' file formats. Last time I tried trunk (2 or 3 months ago, I
> believe), I found out that every file it touched could no longer be opened
> by older versions. Although I would have liked to use the newer features, I
> did not feel brave enough to go down a path that looked very much like a
> one-way street. Other users may be braver than me, though.
> 
> 
> S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM, rgheck  wrote:
> 
> > On 11/20/2009 10:18 AM, Rob Oakes wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Günter,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the thoughts and the links.
> >>
> >> "Unfortunately, you still did not write, how you process your document
> >> with XeTeX. (Export with File>Export>LaTeX (XeTeX) or something alike?)"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > If someone hasn't already said so, I should add that the next major release
> > of LyX will have native support for XeTeX. This has been in trunk, actually,
> > for quite a while. So those of you who use and really need XeTeX should
> > think about compiling trunk and trying it out. We'd obviously appreciate the
> > feedback. Be warned, of course, that trunk can sometimes be a bit unstable,
> > so save often (or set autosave to a short value), but I don't think there
> > are any major known issues at the moment.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> 
> 

Re: XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[stefano franchi]

Richard,

 I wonder if the file format used in trunk (or rather the lyx2lyx
converter that deals with it) is still unable to revert back to previous
versions' file formats. Last time I tried trunk (2 or 3 months ago, I
believe), I found out that every file it touched could no longer be opened
by older versions. Although I would have liked to use the newer features, I
did not feel brave enough to go down a path that looked very much like a
one-way street. Other users may be braver than me, though.


S.





On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM, rgheck  wrote:

> On 11/20/2009 10:18 AM, Rob Oakes wrote:
>
>> Hi Günter,
>>
>> Thank you for the thoughts and the links.
>>
>> "Unfortunately, you still did not write, how you process your document
>> with XeTeX. (Export with File>Export>LaTeX (XeTeX) or something alike?)"
>>
>>
>>
> If someone hasn't already said so, I should add that the next major release
> of LyX will have native support for XeTeX. This has been in trunk, actually,
> for quite a while. So those of you who use and really need XeTeX should
> think about compiling trunk and trying it out. We'd obviously appreciate the
> feedback. Be warned, of course, that trunk can sometimes be a bit unstable,
> so save often (or set autosave to a short value), but I don't think there
> are any major known issues at the moment.
>
> Richard
>
>


-- 
__
Stefano Franchi
Department of Philosophy   Ph:   (1) 979 862-2211
Texas A&M University Fax: (1) 979 845-0458
College Station, Texas, USA

Re: Wassenhoven and lastchecked-option

[jezZiFeR]

http://konx.net/biblatex-mla/

but I don´t know if I have to install both of those files, or if  
biblatex version 0.8d is sufficient.
Is it convenient to just replace the old files with these and to do  
a texhash then?


Well, I´ve tried that now, and again I just get errors when compiling:  
Many "Undefined control sequence." and "Package biblatex Error:  
Outdated 'csquotes' package." Could somebody please tell me, where to  
find a current csquotes-package?


Thank you, I know, I´m not very good with this…
Best
Jess















Am 20.11.2009 um 18:05 schrieb Dominik Waßenhoven:


jezZiFeR wrote:


I now updated to (or at leat I tried) biblatex-dw.tds-1 2, and now I
can´t compile the pdf at all, because I get the following errors:
LaTeX Error: \...@macro@editor+othersstrg undefined.
Package keyval Error: idemtracker undefined.


Did you update both biblatex and biblatex-dw?


I did the update by just removing the old folders and replacing them
by the new ones, after that I did a texhash.


This should be sufficient.


While I was replacing the files I also found, that there is a
"biblatex" and a "biblatex-dw"-folder also (OSX) in:
texmf/tex/latex
Could that be a problem? This was also the case before updating.


When it worked before, this shouldn't be the problem, but I don't know
OSX.

Regards,
Dominik.-

Re: Wassenhoven and lastchecked-option

[jezZiFeR]

Dear Dominik, dear list,

I think the problem is, that I did not update biblatex, and I do not  
know how to do that – maybe someone could help. In the wiki I can just  
find instructions, how to install biblatex, not how to update. I also  
do not know, where to find a current biblatex-version. What I found is  
this:


http://konx.net/biblatex-mla/

but I don´t know if I have to install both of those files, or if  
biblatex version 0.8d is sufficient.
Is it convenient to just replace the old files with these and to do a  
texhash then?


Thank you again
Jess








Am 20.11.2009 um 18:05 schrieb Dominik Waßenhoven:


jezZiFeR wrote:


I now updated to (or at leat I tried) biblatex-dw.tds-1 2, and now I
can´t compile the pdf at all, because I get the following errors:
LaTeX Error: \...@macro@editor+othersstrg undefined.
Package keyval Error: idemtracker undefined.


Did you update both biblatex and biblatex-dw?


I did the update by just removing the old folders and replacing them
by the new ones, after that I did a texhash.


This should be sufficient.


While I was replacing the files I also found, that there is a
"biblatex" and a "biblatex-dw"-folder also (OSX) in:
texmf/tex/latex
Could that be a problem? This was also the case before updating.


When it worked before, this shouldn't be the problem, but I don't know
OSX.

Regards,
Dominik.-

Re: Wassenhoven and lastchecked-option

[Dominik Waßenhoven]

jezZiFeR wrote:

> I now updated to (or at leat I tried) biblatex-dw.tds-1 2, and now I  
> can´t compile the pdf at all, because I get the following errors:
> LaTeX Error: \...@macro@editor+othersstrg undefined.
> Package keyval Error: idemtracker undefined.

Did you update both biblatex and biblatex-dw? 

> I did the update by just removing the old folders and replacing them  
> by the new ones, after that I did a texhash.

This should be sufficient.
 
> While I was replacing the files I also found, that there is a  
> "biblatex" and a "biblatex-dw"-folder also (OSX) in:
> texmf/tex/latex
> Could that be a problem? This was also the case before updating.

When it worked before, this shouldn't be the problem, but I don't know
OSX.

Regards,
Dominik.-

XeLaTeX in LyX 1.7/2.0

[rgheck]

On 11/20/2009 10:18 AM, Rob Oakes wrote:

Hi Günter,

Thank you for the thoughts and the links.

"Unfortunately, you still did not write, how you process your document
with XeTeX. (Export with File>Export>LaTeX (XeTeX) or something alike?)"

   
If someone hasn't already said so, I should add that the next major 
release of LyX will have native support for XeTeX. This has been in 
trunk, actually, for quite a while. So those of you who use and really 
need XeTeX should think about compiling trunk and trying it out. We'd 
obviously appreciate the feedback. Be warned, of course, that trunk can 
sometimes be a bit unstable, so save often (or set autosave to a short 
value), but I don't think there are any major known issues at the moment.


Richard

Re: XeLaTeX, fontenc, LyX and Stubborn fonts

[Rob Oakes]

Hi Günter,

Thank you for the thoughts and the links.

"Unfortunately, you still did not write, how you process your document
with XeTeX. (Export with File>Export>LaTeX (XeTeX) or something alike?)"

I set up LyX according to the instructions on the LyX wiki:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/XeTeX

Briefly, this entailed creating a new "PDF (xetex) File Format" and a
LyX->XeTeX converter.  To export, then, I either use Export -> PDF
(xelatex) or View-> PDF (XeTeX).

"This should not be necessary if you export for XeTeX. Otherwise, it is
a bug ... Any system font is not compatible with T1 font encoding and
fontenc is not needed with XeTeX."

Is there a way to prepare a LyX document for XeTeX export?  The root of
my problem has been that LyX always includes fontenc in the exported
document (whether it is needed or not).  After looking at a couple of
exported documents, the hack I described in the previous email works
because the encoding is set to [] rather than a particular value.

"> I tried to create a font definition and proper LaTeX package for it,
but finally got frustrated and just gave up.

You can only create a "XeTeX package" for OpenType fonts (relying on
fontspec)." 

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I tried to create a package for pdflatex,
according to the instructions on this web site:
http://existentialtype.net/2008/07/12/fonts-in-latex-part-two-pdftex-and-opentype/

As I mentioned in the previous email, it wasn't pretty.  (Whenever I do
anything for the first time, it usually isn't.)

I've been poring over the fontspec guide for the past few days (it was
invaluable in helping me to get the font issues sorted in my document
class).  I'll further take a look at the fontenc guide.

Cheers,

Rob

Re: Wassenhoven and lastchecked-option

[jezZiFeR]

Dear Dominik, dear list,

I now updated to (or at leat I tried) biblatex-dw.tds-1 2, and now I  
can´t compile the pdf at all, because I get the following errors:

LaTeX Error: \...@macro@editor+othersstrg undefined.
Package keyval Error: idemtracker undefined.
I did the update by just removing the old folders and replacing them  
by the new ones, after that I did a texhash.


While I was replacing the files I also found, that there is a  
"biblatex" and a "biblatex-dw"-folder also (OSX) in:

texmf/tex/latex
Could that be a problem? This was also the case before updating.

Thanks, best
Jess






Am 19.11.2009 um 16:28 schrieb Dominik Waßenhoven:


jezZiFeR wrote:


Option 'date=long'.


I´ve entered that in the preamble in the following manner:
\usepackage[natbib=true,style=authortitle-dw, style=footnote-
dw,date=long]{biblatex}


First, note that you should use /either/ authortitle-dw /or/
footnote-dw, not both styles! (It does no harm, since the last option
overrides the previously given one.)

The next thing is, I gave you not the correct hint, since it's not
date=long, but urldate=long for the urldate. Note that the month will
come out abbreviated as long as you use 'abbreviate=true' (which is  
the

default). Thus, for a full month, you should use the options
'urldate=long' and 'abbreviate=false'. If you would like to preserve
other abbreviations (like 'ed.'/'Hrsg.'), you could leave the  
abbreviate

option as is and change the way biblatex handles the month names:

8<--->8
\DefineBibliographyStrings{ngerman}{%
november = {November}
}
8<--->8

Thus, the month name will not be abbreviated, even if  
abbreviate=true is

set.

Regards,
Dominik.-

Re: "Directory path to the document cannot contain spaces"

[Adam Hoffman]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Manolo Martí­nez
wrote:

> Just in case, the document in question is the LyX document, not a BibTeX
> document, right?
>
> M
>
> Uwe Stöhr escribió:
>
>  Adam Hoffman schrieb:
>>
>>  I recently installed LyX 1.6.4-1 on a Windows 7 system, and I'm having an
>>> issue that is not common to my previous LyX installs (1.6.?) on an XP SP3
>>> and Vista 64 SP1 system.
>>>
>>> Whenever I try to generate a pdf/dvi/ps file from a file path that
>>> includes
>>> spaces, I get an error message indicating that this is not permitted.  I
>>> am
>>> not having this issue with previous installs of LyX.  Can anyone explain
>>> the
>>> source of the issue and, more importantly, how I can resolve it?
>>>
>>
>> You are the first one reporting this problem. I don't have Windows 7 to
>> test but I got feedback that it works when you use my alternative LyX for
>> Windows installer:
>> http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller
>> So you can try to uninstall LyX _completely_ and afterwards reinstall it
>> using this installer.
>>
>> regards Uwe
>>
>>
>
Yes, it is a LyX document, in a subfolder of 'My Documents', which is the
source of the space in the file name.

Although I searched the archive before posting, I apparently didn't use the
right keywords.  A similar issue was noted in 2000, several versions prior.
 There was no clear resolution to this post.

http://www.mail-archive.com/lyx-users@lists.lyx.org/msg08169.html


Presumably this was addressed previously, as I do not have a problem with
this on my other LyX-installed systems.

Re: "Directory path to the document cannot contain spaces"

[Manolo Martí­nez]

Just in case, the document in question is the LyX document, not a BibTeX 
document, right?


M

Uwe Stöhr escribió:

Adam Hoffman schrieb:

I recently installed LyX 1.6.4-1 on a Windows 7 system, and I'm 
having an
issue that is not common to my previous LyX installs (1.6.?) on an XP 
SP3

and Vista 64 SP1 system.

Whenever I try to generate a pdf/dvi/ps file from a file path that 
includes
spaces, I get an error message indicating that this is not 
permitted.  I am
not having this issue with previous installs of LyX.  Can anyone 
explain the

source of the issue and, more importantly, how I can resolve it?


You are the first one reporting this problem. I don't have Windows 7 
to test but I got feedback that it works when you use my alternative 
LyX for Windows installer:

http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller
So you can try to uninstall LyX _completely_ and afterwards reinstall 
it using this installer.


regards Uwe

Re: "Directory path to the document cannot contain spaces"

[Uwe Stöhr]

Adam Hoffman schrieb:


I recently installed LyX 1.6.4-1 on a Windows 7 system, and I'm having an
issue that is not common to my previous LyX installs (1.6.?) on an XP SP3
and Vista 64 SP1 system.

Whenever I try to generate a pdf/dvi/ps file from a file path that includes
spaces, I get an error message indicating that this is not permitted.  I am
not having this issue with previous installs of LyX.  Can anyone explain the
source of the issue and, more importantly, how I can resolve it?


You are the first one reporting this problem. I don't have Windows 7 to test but I got feedback that 
it works when you use my alternative LyX for Windows installer:

http://wiki.lyx.org/Windows/LyXWinInstaller
So you can try to uninstall LyX _completely_ and afterwards reinstall it using 
this installer.

regards Uwe

Re: Package unitsdef does not work correctly

[Uwe Stöhr]

Marcus schrieb:


I migrated a LaTex project into Lyx. (karmic, Lyx1.3)


LyX 1.3 is extremely out of date. I recommend to use LyX 1.6.


The document has many numbers with a unit like 2.5 µl or 280 nm² etc.
In LaTex I used the 
http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/unitsdef.html

unitsdef package . It makes sure that the actual unit is not separated from
the value.


You don't need unitsdef for this purpose, LyX has two built in solutions: either you insert a half 
space (Ctrl+Shift+Space) between value and unit or you use the command \unittwo in a formula. For a 
detailed description see the Math manual (Appendix A, sec. 8.1) that you find in LyX's Help menu.


regards Uwe

Re: Wassenhoven ans lastchecked-option

[jezZiFeR]

Dear Dominik,

thanks!


The next thing is, I gave you not the correct hint, since it's not
date=long, but urldate=long for the urldate. Note that the month  
will
come out abbreviated as long as you use 'abbreviate=true' (which  
is  the default). Thus, for a full month, you should use the options

'urldate=long' and 'abbreviate=false'.

I have entered that now.
Interestingly, the other abbreviations are still there ("Hrsg.",   
"Bd."), and the month is now displayed as abbreviated word of the   
month, e.g. "(besucht am 15.Jan.2005)".


I cannot reproduce that. Are you sure that abbreviate=false is set  
and active?


\usepackage[natbib=true,style=footnote- 
dw,urldate=long,abbreviate=false]{biblatex}

This is the only line I entered regarding biblatex.

Do you have other settings in biblatex.cfg? Which versions are you  
using? You can easily check the versions by adding \listfiles to  
your preamble, then a file list is appended to the .log file. I use  
the following package versions:


*File List* [parts of it]
biblatex.sty2009/09/20 v0.8i programmable bibliographies
etoolbox.sty2009/08/06 v1.8 e-TeX tools for LaTeX
url.sty2006/04/12  ver 3.3  Verb mode for urls, etc.
biblatex.def2009/09/20 v0.8i biblatex generic definitions
bibnatex.def2009/07/04 v0.8e biblatex natbib compatibility
standard.bbx2009/07/04 v0.8e biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
authortitle-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
footnote-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.cbx2009/10/20 v1.2l biblatex citation style
footnote-dw.cbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex citation style
biblatex.cfg2009/08/14 biblatex configuration (DW)



 *File List*
biblatex.sty2008/12/13 v0.8b programmable bibliographies
biblatex.def2008/12/13 v0.8b biblatex generic definitions
bibnatex.def2008/11/29 v0.8a biblatex natbib compatibility
standard.bbx2008/10/02 v0.8 biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.bbx2008/12/19 v1.2e biblatex bibliography style
  german.lbx2008/10/02 v0.8 biblatex localization
german-dw.lbx2008/12/19 v1.2e biblatex localization file
authortitle-dw.bbx2008/12/19 v1.2e biblatex bibliography style
footnote-dw.bbx2008/10/09 v1.2 biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.cbx2008/12/19 v1.2e biblatex citation style
footnote-dw.cbx2008/12/19 v1.2e biblatex citation style
biblatex.cfg
 ngerman.lbx2008/10/02 v0.8 biblatex localization

So – I should update, hm?



Is there any special way in which I would have to enter the calendar
date in BibDesk?


e.g.: urldate = {2009-11-20}
For further details see the biblatex documentation


That´s the way I entered the dates…


Is there also a possibility to get a blank space before the month’s
name?


It should be there, and it is in my documents. So you seem to have  
altered something that causes this behaviour. If I use your minimal  
example you sent earlier and add the biblatex options  
'urldate=long,abbreviate=false', everything is fine (and the  
abbreviations disappear).


Okay, here the minimal example has the same problems. Maybe I should  
just update biblatex-dw, and try again?
In the minimal example you could see everything I have entered in my  
document. Is there anything I have changed, which I don´t see?





8<--->8
\DefineBibliographyStrings{ngerman}{%
november = {November}
}
8<--->8

In this case I get the following error:
Package babel Error: You haven't loaded the option ngerman yet.
and I don´t know what this means…


My example uses the language 'ngerman' which you have adapt if you  
are using another language like 'english' or 'german' or whatever.  
In your example you had the following line:

\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}
So I assume that you are using 'ngerman' as your default language  
and the above example should work.


Yes, I use "ngerman". I´m going to update now, maybe this is changing  
something.


Thank you again, best*
Jess

Re: XeLaTeX, fontenc, LyX and Stubborn Fonts

[Guenter Milde]

On 2009-11-19, Rob Oakes wrote:

> ...  While reading through the old emails, I was able to
> resolve the problem. 

Unfortunately, you still did not write, how you process your document
with XeTeX. (Export with File>Export>LaTeX (XeTeX) or something alike?)

> To solve it, I went to Tools->Preferences->LaTeX
> and changed the TeX encoding to a null value (blank).  

This should not be necessary if you export for XeTeX. Otherwise, it is
a bug.

> I also had to change the underlying document class to load its
> defaults from the scrbook document class instead of from book.  The only
> font that I could get to reliably work with book was computer modern

Strange.

> The only explanation that I could come up with for my problem was that
> the Open Type font I was given isn't compatible with a T1 font encoding.

Any system font is not compatible with T1 font encoding and
fontenc is not needed with XeTeX.

> I tried to create a font definition and proper LaTeX package for it, but
> finally got frustrated and just gave up.

You can only create a "XeTeX package" for OpenType fonts (relying on
fontspec).

> As I mentioned in my last email, it has been s a very frustrating two
> days.  Whenever I have this much trouble with a piece of technology, I
> like to create a brief write up of the things that I learned.  It gives
> me a reference to go back to in the future.  Topics I'd like to include
> are a discussion of the LaTeX fonts, TeX encoding, and what LyX does by
> default.

> Is anyone aware of a resource (wiki, book chapter, webpage, or blog)
> that discusses the fontenc and fontspec packages in detail?  I think
> that my issue is fairly specific to xetex, so that mailing list may be a
> better place to ask. 

There is a "XeTeX compagnion" PDF available on the net. Also, the XeTeX
home site at SIL should link to more documentation about these issues.

LaTeX font handling (via fontenc) is described in the fntguide.pdf that
should come with every LaTeX distribution.

Günter

Re: What's the difference between \RequirePackage and \usepackage?

[Guenter Milde]

On 2009-11-19, Steve Litt wrote:

> What's the difference between \RequirePackage and \usepackage?

see clsguide.pdf (in the LaTeX base-doc)::

  LaTEX has three types of command.
  
  There are the author commands, such as \section, \emph and \times: most
  of these have short names, all in lower case.
  
  There are also the class and package writer commands: most of these
  have long mixed-case names such as the following.

  \InputIfFileExists \RequirePackage  \PassOptionsToClass
  
  Finally, there are the internal commands used in the LaTEX
  implementation, such as \...@tempcnta, \...@ifnextchar and \...@eha: most of
  these commands contain @ in their name, which means they cannot be used
  in documents, only in class and package files.


> So, when would I need to use \RequirePackage?

no need, but the convention is to use \RequirePackage in a package or
class and \usepackage in a document.

Günter

Re: Wassenhoven ans lastchecked-option

[Dominik Waßenhoven]

jezZiFeR schrieb:


The next thing is, I gave you not the correct hint, since it's not
date=long, but urldate=long for the urldate. Note that the month will
come out abbreviated as long as you use 'abbreviate=true' (which is  
the default). Thus, for a full month, you should use the options

'urldate=long' and 'abbreviate=false'.


I have entered that now.
Interestingly, the other abbreviations are still there ("Hrsg.",  
"Bd."), and the month is now displayed as abbreviated word of the  
month, e.g. "(besucht am 15.Jan.2005)".


I cannot reproduce that. Are you sure that abbreviate=false is set and 
active? Do you have other settings in biblatex.cfg? Which versions are 
you using? You can easily check the versions by adding \listfiles to 
your preamble, then a file list is appended to the .log file. I use the 
following package versions:


 *File List* [parts of it]
biblatex.sty2009/09/20 v0.8i programmable bibliographies
etoolbox.sty2009/08/06 v1.8 e-TeX tools for LaTeX
 url.sty2006/04/12  ver 3.3  Verb mode for urls, etc.
biblatex.def2009/09/20 v0.8i biblatex generic definitions
bibnatex.def2009/07/04 v0.8e biblatex natbib compatibility
standard.bbx2009/07/04 v0.8e biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
authortitle-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
footnote-dw.bbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex bibliography style
standard-dw.cbx2009/10/20 v1.2l biblatex citation style
footnote-dw.cbx2009/10/19 v1.2l biblatex citation style
biblatex.cfg2009/08/14 biblatex configuration (DW)
 ***


Is there any special way in which I would have to enter the calendar
date in BibDesk?


e.g.: urldate = {2009-11-20}
For further details see the biblatex documentation


Is there also a possibility to get a blank space before the month’s
name?


It should be there, and it is in my documents. So you seem to have 
altered something that causes this behaviour. If I use your minimal 
example you sent earlier and add the biblatex options 
'urldate=long,abbreviate=false', everything is fine (and the 
abbreviations disappear).



8<--->8
\DefineBibliographyStrings{ngerman}{%
 november = {November}
}
8<--->8


In this case I get the following error:
Package babel Error: You haven't loaded the option ngerman yet.
and I don´t know what this means…


My example uses the language 'ngerman' which you have adapt if you are 
using another language like 'english' or 'german' or whatever. In your 
example you had the following line:

\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}
So I assume that you are using 'ngerman' as your default language and 
the above example should work.


Regards,
Dominik.-