Re: hidden graphics
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 12:49:57AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone considered optionally permitting a graphic to be signified simply by it's file name, instead of a (potentially) enormous box reflecting LyX's representation of its "size"? Working on a document with a significant number of 1/4 to 1/2 page sized graphics, I'm finding that the representations just slow me down. *Particularly* when I'm suffering from the endless "rendering..." notation for .esp files. But not only. But you just put each figure into a figure float, and then you can click it to make it get tiny. Admittedly, it would be nicer if instead of "fig" in read, you got the filename, but that would have its own problems (e.g., really long paths make for much ERT, but removing the path means you may have files with the same name) -Amir
Re: hidden graphics
In the coming graphics inset if you will choose not to render the images it wont scale them and will leave them as a small rectangle. Actually, it does that even if it is rendered. Is it worth it to scale the image in the LyX editing window, or can I avoid this hassle? On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone considered optionally permitting a graphic to be signified simply by it's file name, instead of a (potentially) enormous box reflecting LyX's representation of its "size"? Working on a document with a significant number of 1/4 to 1/2 page sized graphics, I'm finding that the representations just slow me down. *Particularly* when I'm suffering from the endless "rendering..." notation for .esp files. But not only. Best Regards, Larry Marso
Re: "hidden" graphics
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 12:49:57AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Has anyone considered optionally permitting a graphic to be signified > simply by it's file name, instead of a (potentially) enormous box > reflecting LyX's representation of its "size"? > > Working on a document with a significant number of 1/4 to 1/2 page > sized graphics, I'm finding that the representations just slow me > down. *Particularly* when I'm suffering from the endless "rendering..." > notation for .esp files. But not only. But you just put each figure into a figure float, and then you can click it to make it get tiny. Admittedly, it would be nicer if instead of "fig" in read, you got the filename, but that would have its own problems (e.g., really long paths make for much ERT, but removing the path means you may have files with the same name) -Amir
Re: "hidden" graphics
In the coming graphics inset if you will choose not to render the images it wont scale them and will leave them as a small rectangle. Actually, it does that even if it is rendered. Is it worth it to scale the image in the LyX editing window, or can I avoid this hassle? On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Has anyone considered optionally permitting a graphic to be signified > simply by it's file name, instead of a (potentially) enormous box > reflecting LyX's representation of its "size"? > > Working on a document with a significant number of 1/4 to 1/2 page > sized graphics, I'm finding that the representations just slow me > down. *Particularly* when I'm suffering from the endless "rendering..." > notation for .esp files. But not only. > > Best Regards, > > Larry Marso >
