On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 06:04:35PM +0200, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > I did some work on this ages ago, and attach a diff saved from then.
> > Feel free to cannibalize... I have no free time right now to work on it.
> 
> Many thanks, Martin. This will help indeed.
> 
> > I don't precisely remember how it was supposed to work, but I do
> > remember that there were two different types of charstyles:
> >
> > 1) the classical type, programmed in layout files; and
> > 2) "fontstyles", which take the screen font at the cursor (insert)
> > location and turn it into a charstyle. (It also got the LaTeX output
> > font more or less right!). These travel with the document.
> >
> > I hope you get this decyphered :-)
> 
> Yes, I think so.
> However, I think I don't like the division of "classical" and "fontstyle" 
> insets. I think this is not necessary. Most importantly, it seems that you 
> output the fontstyle insets as physical markup, i.e.
> 
> <body text>
> lorem ipsum \textit{\textbf{dolor}} sit amet
> </body text>
> 
> while I want strict logical markup, i.e.
> 
> <preamble>
> \newcommand\mycharstyle{\textit{\textbf{#1}}}
> </preamble>
> <body text>
> lorem ipsum \mycharstyle{dolor} sit amet
> </body text>

Yes, that is better if you can do it.
 
> This is what my patch does. Also I think that *all* charstyles should travel 
> with the document (because people might add their own charstyles to some 
> document classes). So there will be no more "Undefined" charstyles.

Be careful. I don't think it is wise to store everything and the kitchen
sink in the document. And users shouldn't be able to modify a document
class / layout... that stuff belongs more properly in template files.

- Martin

Attachment: pgpyYtlKZ6xcW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to