On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 02:40:27PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
>
> This looks reasonable to me, though I haven't tested it. (I'm still
> obsessing over BibTeX stuff.)
>
> One suggestion: I think CharStyles should by default have an unobtrusive
> presentation, NOT with the label showing.
OK, I did that.
Even better would be a layout parameter specifying the
default, as I remember you had. In XML, we use charstyles
as 'short elements' and then we do want to see the labels
by default.
> The default presentation now (or
> previously?) gets particularly ugly if you try to nest them. Making them
> nest nicely is critical, it seems to me, to any attempt to replace the Text
> Settings dialog with CharStyles, which we are pretty much on the verge of
> doing now. (I think it's really just the menu that needs sorting out for
> that, as we'd need too many CharStyles to just list them all.)
I would already be happy to replace Noun and Emph. But
apparently you are also thinking of replacing all font
attributes? I would be unhappy with that.
There was a huge discussion on the list sone years ago
when I introduced the charstyle inset. You see, in the LyX
philosophy you want to support lgical character styles,
not visual editing ("finger painting"). This means that
all charstyles should represent some meanng -- the name
of a person, emphasising, 'strong' (like in HTML).
In this philosophy, the raw font sttributes would be a
bit hidden awy from the user and their use discouraged.
So, then we wouldn't need too many charstyles...
It would be great to have the three-box decoration mode,
but also not easy. Anyway the infrastructure now in
place in collapsable should make adding this straightforward
if someone bothers to code the rendering and metrics stuff
for it.
> Anyway, the
> crucial thing, I think, is that in the "less intrusive" form, it shouldn't
> significantly change the line height. At present, the "corners" version
> seems to do so more than it needs to: The semi-box is drawn lower in this
> version than when the label is present.
Yes... I don't understand why. I changed it.
> And I'd go a bit further, too, and
> suggest that maybe the unintrusive version should be REALLY unintrusive and
> maybe not have any distinctive appearance at all, except the font. Yes, I
> suppose it would be possible to lose one, but then you can always Open All
> Insets to find it. Or maybe there should be three displays possible here:
> Labeled, Corners, and None, with maybe Corners being default?
I just further narrowed down the drawn image and the metric.
They nest nicely now (and nothing seems to be cut off).
I remember this being particularly tricky.
> Anyway, thoughts....
>
> Richard
Well, this is committed now with the above small changes.
- Martin
