Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 09:30:14AM -0400, rgheck wrote:
I want quickly to summarize where I think this discussion is now.
There are two proposals on the table, one due to Bo and one due (more or
less) to me. The details of these have been described elsewhere.
Right.
So a possible solution of that dilemma would be to leave the issue
to some third person to solve in a way he likes and live with the
result or improve on that result.
Actually, the best solution, it seems to me, would be for us to have a
reasonable conversation about the matter, one in which neither side set
out to defend his own proposal unto the death, refusing to acknowledge
even the slightest change for fear of embarrassment. And then branding
the other party, who was attempting to display some degree of
flexibility, an idiot who lacked even the most basic understanding of
the issues.
But since that has proven impossible, your suggestion is quite sensible.
Were you volunteering? ;-)
I can't resist either...
So the question that seems to me to need answering is this one: Do people
think a sufficient case has been made for Bo's particular proposal, i.e.,
for inset-specific embedding?
Yes, because it is incidentally what I would have used myself if it
would have been available in 1.2.x times. That's also the reason that
I lean towards this solution lately irrespective of the social component
of the discussion.
Well, you should have answered "No", because no serious case HAD been
made. What you've done here is to offer the first approximation of a
real reason to want some kind of selective embedding. An actual case
where it might make some kind of sense. I'd want to hear more about it,
as any such approach has costs both at the UI level and at the code
level as compared to a simple on-off switch, or (an idea spurred by
something you said elsewhere) a series of them: embed all graphics;
embed all bibfiles; etc. And there are other ways to get what you want here.
So, well, there are trade-offs all around. As usual. But people engaged
in reasonable discussion, who were actually interested in what would be
best for LyX and not what is best for one person's own idiosyncratic way
of working, those people could probably reach an agreement fairly
quickly on how to proceed.
Richard
