Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 13:21:56 +0200 schrieb Daniel <xraco...@gmx.de>: > On 2020-08-10 12:59, Daniel wrote: > > On 2020-08-10 12:42, Daniel wrote: > >> On 2020-08-10 12:08, Kornel Benko wrote: > >>> Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 11:32:35 +0200 > >>> schrieb Daniel <xraco...@gmx.de>: > >>> > >>>> On 2020-08-10 09:15, Kornel Benko wrote: > >>>>> Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 08:24:56 +0200 > >>>>> schrieb Daniel <xraco...@gmx.de>: > >>>>>> Attached is a chart of LyX font sizes. Does anyone else find it > >>>>>> slightly > >>>>>> confusing that LyX uses two different naming schemes (in addition to > >>>>>> LaTeX)? Maybe some historic reason? If possible, I suggest to go for > >>>>>> only one naming scheme. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I guess the LaTeX naming scheme for large font sizes is a bit > >>>>>> non-descriptive (using capitals to indicate > >>>>>> comparatives/superlatives). > >>>>>> So, I guess that is why there is a deviation from LaTeX. I am > >>>>>> still not > >>>>>> fully sure that it is a good idea to use different names because > >>>>>> people > >>>>>> will have to remember two different schemes instead of one. > >>>>> > >>>>> LyX is _not_ latex. It describes the font sizes for a variety of > >>>>> output > >>>>> formats. Besides, the GUI is translatable. Only the English version > >>>>> would > >>>>> suit your needs. > >>>>> > >>>>> We do not expect our users are latex experts. > >>>>>> But insofar as the more descriptive names should stay, I suggest to > >>>>>> match Gui and LyX names in the following way (which actually helps to > >>>>>> create less of a rift between LaTeX and LyX): > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - "Huger" (Gui name) instead of "Giant" (LyX name) because it matches > >>>>>> better the LaTeX naming (\Huge). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Gui/LaTeX names for smaller font sizes because they are more > >>>>>> descriptive, i.e. "Footnotesize" and "Scriptsize" (LyX name) > >>>>>> instead of > >>>>>> "Smaller" and "Smallest" (Gui name). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I guess the latter needs some argument: while there is no match of > >>>>>> sectioning sizes to large sizes because they depend on the class, > >>>>>> "footnotesize" and "scriptsize" match the respective sizes in classes > >>>>>> (as far as I know). So, it's helpful to know that if one wants to > >>>>>> match > >>>>>> other elements in the text. > >>>> > >>>> While LyX _is_ not LaTeX, but isn't it _based on_ LaTeX (ideas).[1] And > >>>> I guess it's the most widely used output format. Also, that LyX is does > >>>> not explain why Gui and LyX names differ. > >>> > >>> Reading Intro.lyx, there is nowhere mentioned latex. > >>> The first line > >>> LyX is a document preparation system. > >>> describes almost precisely as to what lyx is aimed to. > >>> > >>> Yes, lyx is created also with latex in mind. But since we support > >>> other formats too, > >>> I don't see why we should be more latex centric. > >>> > >>>> You are right, I forgot about the language translation issues. However, > >>>> I don't see why, at least in English the Gui and LyX names shouldn't > >>>> match. And then be translated from there. Here is a translation > >>>> friendly > >>>> version of my other suggestions with German examples: > >>>> > >>>> Why doesn't the GUI use the translated version of the LyX name? > >>> > >>> What do you mean (I don't understand the term 'LyX name')? > >> > >> "LyXname" is the name used in LyX's code for size names used in the > >> layout files. These differ from those used in the GUI, see my > >> attachment in the first message of the current threat. > >> > >>>> - "Riesiger" instead of "Gigantisch" (Gui and LyX name) because it > >>>> matches better the translated LaTeX naming (\Huge). (Here the German > >>>> version actually differs from the English version in that both Gui and > >>>> LyX names are the same. Good! But "Riesiger" would be a slightly better > >>>> as a translation of LaTeX's Huge, I think.) > >>> > >>> As said, we are not latex. > >> > >> Here is a slightly more elaborate argument: > >> > >> "Riesiger" instead of "Gigantisch" (Gui and LyX name) because it > >> matches better the translated LaTeX naming (\Huge) *and why not match > >> it if we already use comparatives such as "larger" anyway*. > >> > >>>> - Translated LyX/LaTeX names (Previously, I mistakenly wrote "Gui name" > >>>> instead of "LyX name") for smaller font sizes because they are more > >>>> descriptive, i.e. "Fußnotengröße" and "Skriptgröße" (translated > >>>> LyX/LaTeX name) instead of "Kleiner" and "Sehr klein" (Gui name). > >>> > >>> More descriptive yes, but the GUI is for a normal user better > >>> understandable IMHO. > >> > >> Yes, in one way, the GUI is better understandable for a complete > >> typesetting notice. For example, this person might not know what > >> "script" means. However, in the font size chooser the sizes are > >> already ordered, so it might be no problem to deduce this. And > >> everyone not knowing the LyX internal translation, including the > >> notice and LaTeX expert, will be lost if they try to match the font > >> size of a footnote (or script). > >> > >>>> The argument I gave seems to apply independent of translation, I think. > >>>> > >>>> However, if using "footnotesize" and "scriptsize" turn out to be too > >>>> problematic because it does not make sense for some output formats, > >>>> then > >>>> I suggest to use the English Gui names as LyX names. > >>>> > >>>> In summary, I still don't understand why > >>>> > >>>> 1. LyX names are not _closer_ to LaTeX names, > >>>> 2. English Gui and LyX names differ. > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LyX (Though there seem to be some > >>>> mistakes on the page. It claims that the Table Editor and Math Editor > >>>> are WYSIWYG. I guess they are WYSIWYM, strictly speaking.-- > > > > ps. Attached is my suggestion. The upshot would be that people familiar > > with LaTeX would basically have to remember only naming scheme and some > > names are more descriptive. > > Here are the alternatives as I see it: > > - Let the LyX names match more the LaTeX names, i.e. "Giant" becomes > "Huger". > - Let the LyX names match the Gui names (but different from the LaTeX > names).
+1 from me.
> I think that at least there is no reason for having *three* different
> schemes.
+1.
Kornel
pgp4cdvhGXIqe.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
-- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
