Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 17:09:28 +0200 schrieb Daniel <xraco...@gmx.de>: > On 10/8/20 17:06, Kornel Benko wrote: > > Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:31:52 +0200 > > schrieb Daniel <xraco...@gmx.de>: > > > >> On 10/8/20 13:51, Kornel Benko wrote: > >>> 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. > >> > >> So you are suggesting to do both of those changes, right? > > So, you are indifferent whether both should be called "Giant" or "Huger.
I have not found 'huger' in the dictionary, so Giant is OK for me.
But I would drop footnotesize and scriptsize and use smaller+smallest and use
the GUI
names here.
> > No, only the last.
> >
> >>>> I think that at least there is no reason for having *three* different
> >>>> schemes.
> >>>
> >>> +1.
> >>
> >> I am still inclined that one rather than two size schemes is even better
> >> and I like the extra information given by "footnotesize" and
> >> "scriptsize". But I must confess that I am only using LyX with LaTeX and
> >> don't have a good feel for LyX being used in other ways--
> Daniel
>
Kornel
pgp0axAiZ8Cq9.pgp
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
-- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
