On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:06:59PM +0300, Yuriy Skalko wrote: > > > I'm working on the highly variative document that contains many branches > > > frequently changing their states. And it is not very convenient because it > > > is impossible to see immediately if current branch inset is inverted or > > > not. > > > Have you experienced such issue? What do you think about marking inverted > > > insets in some way? Maybe darker/different label color? Or some additional > > > symbol like "!"? > > > > > > I have experienced this also. I think using a symbol is better for > > accessibility reasons. Perhaps additionally changing the color could be > > considered as well. > > Thanks for fast reply, Scott! > I'm glad to know that it is not only my problem. > > > > > Really I'm also thinking about more flexible system -- to connect branch > > > insets to branches using logical expressions. So the branch inset could > > > have > > > logical combination of existing branches, not just branch name with > > > optional > > > inversion. For example now it is impossible to have a part of the document > > > that will be outputted when any of 2 branches is active. But with logical > > > expressions we will have inset "FirstBranch or SecondBranch" that solves > > > this task. More complex combinations also will be possible. > > > > I like this idea a lot. I would also be interested in a dependency > > structure of branches (i.e., not variable by insets) along the lines of > > "branch Q depends on branch C and branch D so to activate branch Q, > > branches C and D must also be activated". I think we should think hard > > about exactly what features we want and the interface. Ideally we would > > extend the current functionality without making the interface much more > > complex for most users who I think do not use branches in the way you > > and I have in mind. > > > > Best, > > Scott > > Really logical AND operation on branches can be implemented now by nesting > insets. Do you want to get separate Q to get simpler expressions/insets in > other places in the document?
Good question. Indeed I have used nested branches until now. But I find the nesting annoying, and I always have to pause to think what should I nest in what? But thinking about it more, perhaps your proposed feature would work for what I want. I don't have much time to think about this more now, but I do like that we're having this discussion. Perhaps we should write down a few use cases that would motivte which features we consider. Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
