Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | I have to admit, I'm rather disenchanted with xforms at the moment for > | two reasons: > | 1. xforms development seems to have stopped (witness a grand total of 42 > | emails in 10 threads to the list in 2003, all of them user questions and > | answers rather than development) > | 2. my emails to the xforms list just 'dissappear' > | > | I'm a little saddened by this because it really is small and simple and > | easy to understand. Ah well... > > This is how I have felt with XForms for the last two years. > > I have _no_ confidence that the XForms project will wake up and move > forward. IMHO as it stands now the only options is a "hostile" fork. > That might jolt the current XForms people a bit...
Well given that I can't even communicate with them, I don't see how they'll ever know ;-) More seriously, I'm of the same opinion as you. I don' anicipate any serious development of the xforms sources, but I do have patches here to: * handle keypress events cleanly (cleans up the code in XWorkArea). * exit gracefully if the creation of an input method fails. * pass key release events to the widgets. * correctly update a tabfolder's coords when the dialog is moved. (Means that tooltips appear in the right place.) * handle tooltips in 'complex' widgets (like the browser that is made up of several simpler ones). * handle autorepeat events in the slider more intelligently. In addition to all this, CG Han has added CJK support to the xforms library so there would be little stopping us rolling CJK-LyX into LyX-proper. That would be a _real_ test of any future unicode work ;-) Regards, -- Angus
