Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 11:13:34PM +0200, Dov Feldstern wrote:
Martin Vermeer wrote:
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:49:22 +0100
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Martin Vermeer <martin.vermeer-RGpGn/[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But I am not sure I understand. Why is forceLTR true for ERT? Just for
display purpose?
The truth is, it shouldn't be. We're overloading the usage of forceLTR ---
a slight misunderstanding between me and Martin. I actually suggested
having *two* separate options in the layout: "forceLTR" and "Language".
Almost always, these properties would be set together. But ERT is a good
example where only "Language" should be set.
So now, the question becomes "Why is Language set to latex_language for
ERT?"
And I believe the answer is: "Yes, just for display purpose".
Urm... I think we have already too many overloads of everything
according to _what it is_ ('language' / 'ERT') instead of how it
acts ('display LTR without fancy guessing').
Why not have virtual function in Inset for all 'acting'?
I'm not sure how this would work in practice: do you mean that instead
of having "forceRTL", "allowEmpty", "isFreeSpacing"..., to have only a
single method which would output the contents accordingly? Wouldn't that
be a step back from being able to have custom insets which are
configurable just by changing a layout?
[And yes, I know, the asFooInset are a bad precedence...]
Andre'
