> > 1. charstyle is more difficult to use than font change. For example, > > if you have abcdef in a charstyle, and you want to change all or part > > of them to normal style, several steps are needed. Toggle-bold etc are > > much easier in this case. So, for simple cases, font-change is easier > > and should be preferred. > > > Nothing stops us from having toggles on our built-in > charstyles.
Not for 1.5.x, right? > > 2. charstyles are not ready for 1.5.0. There is no default charstyle > > defined anywhere, and there is no easy way to create one. Do you guys > > really expect a normal user to hand-edit a .layout file? > > > Not at all. Which is why I suggested that LyX ships with > "strong" and "emph" charstyles predefined. _We_ can > put those two into the .layouts we distribute so that > the users won't have to! They will only need that > hand-editing if they want _more_ charstyles. > My impression is that charstyles works in 1.5, there is just no > user-friendly way of adding them. This does not prevent > developers from adding some common styles. Remember that lyx 1.5.0 needs to read all files produced by 1.5.x, adding strong and emph charstyle to 1.5.x is not possible. > With emph and strong, you do have a bold. Unless you > redefine strong - but if you do that, then you're able to > define some other bold. The problem is exactly that we do not have \strong. And even with \strong, it may be not as easy to use as \textbf. All your points are based on your assumption that you can add \strong to 1.5.x, but this is NOT possible. Cheers, Bo
