Jan Peters wrote: > 1) it should be possible to activate these without going into the text > files, why is there not View->Toolbars->Math,Extra,MiniBuffer,etc > menu which allows this?
Because nobody implemented it. > 2) Why is it still a less pleasant experience to edit an equation in > LyX than in either MathType (oh horror) or Scientific Workplace? > Moving *everything* from the math panel into reconfigurable toolbars > is a must for user friendliness. Maybe because the developers don't use the math panel? I either use shortcuts or type in directly the LaTeX code. I use the math panel only for constructs I need so seldom that I can not remember the short cut. I personally would not want to have these waisting space in a toolbar. This does not mean that there is no room for improvement, it is only an attempt to explain the current situation. > Again, since 1.4, I am persuaded that LyX is technically completely > there and few new real features are needed (search and replace > of equations parts; more symbolic math, e.g., see my comparison > http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/LyxVersusScientificWorkplace). > What LyX mainly needs is some *polishing* so that users stay with it > after trying it. Math editing which beats SWP or MathType would > be a very important step. >From your posts it looks like you are not aware that LyX has a developer man power problem: There are several useful polishing tasks that would be desirable, but there are not enough developers available who do the work. And of course (since this is a volunteer project) everybody implements what he wants to implement, which does not need to be what the majority of users wants). That explains the strange mix of highly developed areas (e.g. graphics handling) and other parts that are missing basic features (e.g. math macros) in LyX. Georg
