Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 02:15, Stacia Hartleben wrote: Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to answer and I can't really find any posts about how exactly to use this great new feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my Sanskrit assignment if I can to test it out. I've tried it with both Sanskrit text and Japanese, and both of them said this once I changed the encoding to UTF8: Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set up for use with LaTeX Unfortunately the support for utf8 encoding in LaTeX is rather incomplete, and some packages do not work with utf8 encoded files at all. Therefore it is not the default encoding for LaTeX output in LyX. Umm, kind of funny that it's saying it doesn't know what the unicode char is but then goes out and says what it is in the info. Indeed. When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just has a bunch of undefined control sequence errors. Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of undefined control sequence stuff. If you want to help with this stuff you could put a simple test document (both for japanese and for sanskrit) into bugzilla. I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the final version makes this stuff a little more transparent for the user - I wouldn't want to have to hack around with the preamble every time I play with a new script. I hope so too, but the translation to LaTeX is not trivial. The first goal for 1.5.0 was to be able to output everything that 1.4. can output - that goal has almost been reached (with some minor problems with RTL languages that are currently discussed, and the CJK stuff is not integrated yet). We will see whether we will be able to do more in 1.5.0, or whether that comes in a later 1.5.x release. Georg
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stacia Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to
Stacia answer and I can't really find any posts about how exactly to
Stacia use this great new feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my
Stacia Sanskrit assignment if I can to test it out. I've tried it
Stacia with both Sanskrit text and Japanese, and both of them said
Stacia this once I changed the encoding to UTF8:
Stacia Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set
Stacia up for use with LaTeX
Hello Stacia,
The problem is that utf8 output only works for latin and cyrillic
character set at LaTeX level. These are also the encodings that LyX is
able to handle currently as 8bit characters.
This means that support for non-european scripts still needs to be done.
Stacia Then I tried putting \usepackage{ucs} in the preamble as I saw
Stacia something about it in an old LyX post. Now it gives a
Stacia different error message, but pretty much the same thing -
Stacia Package ucs error: Unknown Unicode character 12399 = U+306F
Stacia (for example with Japanese hiragana HA) Then it gives this in
Stacia the info:
Interesting. I did not know this ucs.sty package. From what I read
here
http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/
I see that the author provides a ucs.sty package, and a utf8x.def
encoding definition. This seems to suggest that, if you use ucs.sty,
you should also use utf8x as encoding.
This requires more experimentation, of course.
Stacia HIRAGANA LETTER HA Character available with following options:
Stacia cjkjis. Enter I!RET to define the glyph.
Stacia When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just
Stacia has a bunch of undefined control sequence errors.
Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine
Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of
Stacia undefined control sequence stuff.
The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to
load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is
to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that
defines these entities is required.
Stacia I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the
Stacia final version makes this stuff a little more transparent for
Stacia the user - I wouldn't want to have to hack around with the
Stacia preamble every time I play with a new script.
The fact is, nobody around here has deep understanding of non-latin
scripts. Therefore, we need some help to understand what output should
be generated for each type of script (and we need time/manpower to
implement it, too).
JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of Stacia undefined control sequence stuff. The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: changing section heading indentation
shawn fitzgibbons wrote:
Is there a global setting that I
can make in the preamble to make all headings {-3pc} into the left margin?
Have a look at the titlesec package that lets you customize the appearance and
placement of section headings:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/titlesec/
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I guess. I saw a Sanskrit package before which used Omega. I have no idea what omega or aleph are or how I could implement them in Windows, I'm afraid. I just use MikTex. What I use now is the velthuius package, but the downside to this is that I have to convert to latex and use a preprocessor on them. The UCS package is really technically and I can't quite figure it out. I think I may have to compile something using a perl script because there are a lot of tgz files, some of which have promising names like devanagari. I'm pretty non-technical but I can give you the examples that I use to typeset Japanese and Sanskrit with now. I'm afraid I can't help you that much with other languages at the moment. On 12/27/06, Jürgen Spitzmüller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of Stacia undefined control sequence stuff. The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out? On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote: It seems that I have misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I guess. I guess the problem is that we have to face LaTeX's limitations. If some languages need extra packages even with unicode input encoding (to *output* unicode properly), we have to add support for those packages by and by. Unicode might be nice, but it cannot do magic. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote:
Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out?
AFAIK this package is not maintained anymore and superseeded by the utf8 input
encoding integrated in the LaTeX base distribution
(i.e., \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}).
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Stacia Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that Stacia out? Since the ucs package is unmaintained by now, it may not be wise to rely on it. This is why having our own tables and/or rely on stable packages makes more sense IMO. JMarc
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Re: Replicating a document layout
Siterer Shawn Willden [EMAIL PROTECTED]: To use LyX to produce the sort of engineering/requirements documentation used by my group, I need to see if I can find/produce a document class that replicates the structure of our Word documents. I guess this could be done in several ways. The best and easiest in the long run would be to hire someone to craft a new LaTeX class, lyx layout and template. However, this would not be gratis and might be a bigger investment than you are willing to do at the moment. Therefore starting with something that are already supported in LyX and live with some changes and warts until you are committed to LyX may be the easiest and best starting point. Here are some tips from the top of my head... The body of the documents are pretty standard section, subsection, etc. structures with numbered headings. The mwrep document class that comes with my copy of LyX (I'm using the current Debian unstable package) is nearly perfect. It's a little annoying that the top-level sections are called Chapters and that they're unnumbered in LyX, but the output is exactly right. AFAIK mwrep is a style made for the polish market and the documentation is in polish which makes it a bit difficult to use for people that do not read polish... Have you tried koma-skript article ? It has a lot more options out of the box, but might not have the look you want ? Read more on koma-script here: ftp://tug.ctan.org/pub/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/koma-script/scrguien.pdf To get numbered sections and subsection adjust the slider in Documents-setting-numbering TOC The main part of that document class that requires customization is the title page and we need footers. snip Each page also needs a footer, containing the file name, page number (e.g. Page n of m), version number and last revision date. Would it be difficult to make something like this? Is there something out there that's close that I could use as a starting point? I cant see anything impossible in what you have described above. Try to find a LaTeX class that have as much of the look you want as possible, but even more important, probably, that it can do what you want and I would again say that koma-script is good :). Another tip is that the label do not matter that much, institute can become copyright statement or document owner if it looks right on paper. And in LyX you can change the name from institute to copyright statement by changing the layout file. If you need to include some changes to the look of a class this is usually possible by adding some LaTeX to the preamble, this can then either be hidden in the layoutfile or in the template file... You can also remove styles from the layoutfile that are not used to make it even more userfriendly. Well, as I said, some pointers to get you started. Do not hesitate to ask questions if you have some questions. Ingar PS do not forget to read the help-Customization chapter 5. --
Re: Using LyX for design documentation
On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 09:13 -0700, Shawn Willden wrote: I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Shawn, unfurtunately I can't supply any detailed help since I've been away from using LaTeX for awhile and I'm just starting to use Lyx. I can tell you, however, the LaTeX *can* be used successfully for design documentation. A company that I used to work for used LaTeX for all the support docs for a special-purpose computer and associated OS. Both hardware and software designs and implementations were documented in LaTeX, and the (home-grown + commercial) tool chain worked with it quite nicely. Our process included maintaining design/implementation docs with the various component source code, etc. and requiring the engineers to maintain the docs for their parts. These small files could be integrated automatically into several distinct larger docs on demand, so LaTeX provided a lot of leverage for keeping documentation in sync with other parts of the development, build and delivery processes. There are numerous style files and extensions available that can be used to produce syntax diagrams and other special-purpose diagrams that are integrated into LaTeX source. We were also able to produce our own packages that supported things like diagrams of registers and other hardware components. This latter does, however, require that somebody (you perhaps :-) becomes a LaTeX and TeX expert. Our home-grown experts figured out TeX commands for trade marks and other logos and custom document styles. We also exploited the ability to write programs that analyzed system engineering docs, figured out things like requirements/design tracking matrices, and churned out LaTeX fragments for inclusion in documents; it *is* just ascii after all. -- Bill Wood
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Alex Casti wrote:
Hello. I'm running the Linux version 1.4.3 on Fedora
5 (64 bit). I'm having trouble with the usual tried
and true method of inserting references with BibTex.
My addition of citations seems to work fine when I
look at the lyx file itself, but the output to DVI or
PDF just gives [?] for the citations, and the
References section is blank.
Hi
I have been trying to get the bibtex referencing to work with a very
simple documents in Linux but my problems looks similar than described
here for the windows. Reference looks good when writing the text in Lyx,
but in the PDF document the references are replaced with [?].
I have myself tested both with the Mandriva 2007 and Debian Etch
(updated 2006.12.25 date) both using the Lyx 1.4.2
I have attached both of the example lyx documents, bibtex files and
generated pdf files as an attachment.
Mandriva 2007 Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test2.lyx
- ref.bif (created with kbibtex)
- test2.pdf
Debian Etch Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test.lyx
- master_thesis_ref.bib (created with gbib)
- test.pdf
My ultimate goal is to use lyx for writing my master thesis in a way
where the text would only show the references number ([3], [21], ...) and
in the end of the document would be a list of all referenced material
(sorted by using authors last name as a key)
I have attached the example files within this document in tar.bz2 package.
(also available from
http://aragorn.kortex.jyu.fi:8080/lyx_bibtex_problem.tar.bz2)
Here are also some of the output I am seeing in the Lyx console when
using Mandriva.
The top-level auxiliary file: test2.aux
The style file: plain.bst
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
:Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
I found no cite keys---while reading file test2.aux
Database file #1:
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
I was expecting a `,' or a `}'---line 1 of file
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
: @book{ Embedded
: Systems Architecture,
I'm skipping whatever remains of this entry
(There were 3 error messages)
OkCancelPolicy: No transition for input SMI_RESTORE from state INITIAL
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99c (Web2C 7.5.5)
The top-level auxiliary file: test.aux
White space in argument---line 2 of file test.aux
: \citation{Levy
:Steven Hackers}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
The style file: plain.bst
Mika
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on Lyx. For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² being displayed rather than the symbol. Any suggestions? My guess is I missed something in the configuration... -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. James On 12/27/06 4:26 PM, David L. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:07:26 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on Lyx. For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² being displayed rather than the symbol. I use LyX on (among others) an AMD-64 machine, and don't have this problem. What distribution/tex are you using? Oddly, on my system your quotes around the \nabla and \nabla appear to me as superscripted 3 and 2 (respectively), so possibly there is something unusual about your X fonts. If the dvi file prints properly, that is where I would suggest looking. -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi or pdf preview, and on paper. What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have installed? -- David L. Johnson __o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a _`\(,_ | conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw (_)/ (_) |
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS release 4 uname -srv gives: Linux 2.6.9-42.0.3.ELsmp #1 SMP Mon Sep 25 17:24:31 EDT 2006 Forgive my lack of Linux prowess, but I don't know what X fonts I have installed, or which latex package I am using. It is whatever comes as the default latex rpm for red-hat linux. James On 12/27/06 4:42 PM, David L. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi or pdf preview, and on paper. What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have installed? -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
lamikr wrote:
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
: Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the argument
of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from Embedded Systems
Architecture to EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture, and you're done (I'm actually
surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
kbibtex author).
Jürgen
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
lamikr wrote:
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
:Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the
argument
of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from Embedded Systems
Architecture to EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture, and you're done (I'm actually
surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
kbibtex author).
That was it, thank you very much. Actually I need to fill a bug both to
the gbib and kbibtex as both of them allowed me to make the same mistake.
Would there be any changes that Lyx could catch errors like these and
give some kind of warning in a situations like this?
Mika
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 02:15, Stacia Hartleben wrote: Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to answer and I can't really find any posts about how exactly to use this great new feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my Sanskrit assignment if I can to test it out. I've tried it with both Sanskrit text and Japanese, and both of them said this once I changed the encoding to UTF8: Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set up for use with LaTeX Unfortunately the support for utf8 encoding in LaTeX is rather incomplete, and some packages do not work with utf8 encoded files at all. Therefore it is not the default encoding for LaTeX output in LyX. Umm, kind of funny that it's saying it doesn't know what the unicode char is but then goes out and says what it is in the info. Indeed. When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just has a bunch of undefined control sequence errors. Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of undefined control sequence stuff. If you want to help with this stuff you could put a simple test document (both for japanese and for sanskrit) into bugzilla. I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the final version makes this stuff a little more transparent for the user - I wouldn't want to have to hack around with the preamble every time I play with a new script. I hope so too, but the translation to LaTeX is not trivial. The first goal for 1.5.0 was to be able to output everything that 1.4. can output - that goal has almost been reached (with some minor problems with RTL languages that are currently discussed, and the CJK stuff is not integrated yet). We will see whether we will be able to do more in 1.5.0, or whether that comes in a later 1.5.x release. Georg
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stacia Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to
Stacia answer and I can't really find any posts about how exactly to
Stacia use this great new feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my
Stacia Sanskrit assignment if I can to test it out. I've tried it
Stacia with both Sanskrit text and Japanese, and both of them said
Stacia this once I changed the encoding to UTF8:
Stacia Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set
Stacia up for use with LaTeX
Hello Stacia,
The problem is that utf8 output only works for latin and cyrillic
character set at LaTeX level. These are also the encodings that LyX is
able to handle currently as 8bit characters.
This means that support for non-european scripts still needs to be done.
Stacia Then I tried putting \usepackage{ucs} in the preamble as I saw
Stacia something about it in an old LyX post. Now it gives a
Stacia different error message, but pretty much the same thing -
Stacia Package ucs error: Unknown Unicode character 12399 = U+306F
Stacia (for example with Japanese hiragana HA) Then it gives this in
Stacia the info:
Interesting. I did not know this ucs.sty package. From what I read
here
http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/
I see that the author provides a ucs.sty package, and a utf8x.def
encoding definition. This seems to suggest that, if you use ucs.sty,
you should also use utf8x as encoding.
This requires more experimentation, of course.
Stacia HIRAGANA LETTER HA Character available with following options:
Stacia cjkjis. Enter I!RET to define the glyph.
Stacia When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just
Stacia has a bunch of undefined control sequence errors.
Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine
Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of
Stacia undefined control sequence stuff.
The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to
load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is
to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that
defines these entities is required.
Stacia I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the
Stacia final version makes this stuff a little more transparent for
Stacia the user - I wouldn't want to have to hack around with the
Stacia preamble every time I play with a new script.
The fact is, nobody around here has deep understanding of non-latin
scripts. Therefore, we need some help to understand what output should
be generated for each type of script (and we need time/manpower to
implement it, too).
JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of Stacia undefined control sequence stuff. The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: changing section heading indentation
shawn fitzgibbons wrote:
Is there a global setting that I
can make in the preamble to make all headings {-3pc} into the left margin?
Have a look at the titlesec package that lets you customize the appearance and
placement of section headings:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/titlesec/
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I guess. I saw a Sanskrit package before which used Omega. I have no idea what omega or aleph are or how I could implement them in Windows, I'm afraid. I just use MikTex. What I use now is the velthuius package, but the downside to this is that I have to convert to latex and use a preprocessor on them. The UCS package is really technically and I can't quite figure it out. I think I may have to compile something using a perl script because there are a lot of tgz files, some of which have promising names like devanagari. I'm pretty non-technical but I can give you the examples that I use to typeset Japanese and Sanskrit with now. I'm afraid I can't help you that much with other languages at the moment. On 12/27/06, Jürgen Spitzmüller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Stacia Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine Stacia into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of Stacia undefined control sequence stuff. The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out? On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote: It seems that I have misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I guess. I guess the problem is that we have to face LaTeX's limitations. If some languages need extra packages even with unicode input encoding (to *output* unicode properly), we have to add support for those packages by and by. Unicode might be nice, but it cannot do magic. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote:
Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out?
AFAIK this package is not maintained anymore and superseeded by the utf8 input
encoding integrated in the LaTeX base distribution
(i.e., \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}).
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia == Stacia Hartleben [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stacia On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Stacia Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that Stacia out? Since the ucs package is unmaintained by now, it may not be wise to rely on it. This is why having our own tables and/or rely on stable packages makes more sense IMO. JMarc
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Re: Replicating a document layout
Siterer Shawn Willden [EMAIL PROTECTED]: To use LyX to produce the sort of engineering/requirements documentation used by my group, I need to see if I can find/produce a document class that replicates the structure of our Word documents. I guess this could be done in several ways. The best and easiest in the long run would be to hire someone to craft a new LaTeX class, lyx layout and template. However, this would not be gratis and might be a bigger investment than you are willing to do at the moment. Therefore starting with something that are already supported in LyX and live with some changes and warts until you are committed to LyX may be the easiest and best starting point. Here are some tips from the top of my head... The body of the documents are pretty standard section, subsection, etc. structures with numbered headings. The mwrep document class that comes with my copy of LyX (I'm using the current Debian unstable package) is nearly perfect. It's a little annoying that the top-level sections are called Chapters and that they're unnumbered in LyX, but the output is exactly right. AFAIK mwrep is a style made for the polish market and the documentation is in polish which makes it a bit difficult to use for people that do not read polish... Have you tried koma-skript article ? It has a lot more options out of the box, but might not have the look you want ? Read more on koma-script here: ftp://tug.ctan.org/pub/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/koma-script/scrguien.pdf To get numbered sections and subsection adjust the slider in Documents-setting-numbering TOC The main part of that document class that requires customization is the title page and we need footers. snip Each page also needs a footer, containing the file name, page number (e.g. Page n of m), version number and last revision date. Would it be difficult to make something like this? Is there something out there that's close that I could use as a starting point? I cant see anything impossible in what you have described above. Try to find a LaTeX class that have as much of the look you want as possible, but even more important, probably, that it can do what you want and I would again say that koma-script is good :). Another tip is that the label do not matter that much, institute can become copyright statement or document owner if it looks right on paper. And in LyX you can change the name from institute to copyright statement by changing the layout file. If you need to include some changes to the look of a class this is usually possible by adding some LaTeX to the preamble, this can then either be hidden in the layoutfile or in the template file... You can also remove styles from the layoutfile that are not used to make it even more userfriendly. Well, as I said, some pointers to get you started. Do not hesitate to ask questions if you have some questions. Ingar PS do not forget to read the help-Customization chapter 5. --
Re: Using LyX for design documentation
On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 09:13 -0700, Shawn Willden wrote: I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Shawn, unfurtunately I can't supply any detailed help since I've been away from using LaTeX for awhile and I'm just starting to use Lyx. I can tell you, however, the LaTeX *can* be used successfully for design documentation. A company that I used to work for used LaTeX for all the support docs for a special-purpose computer and associated OS. Both hardware and software designs and implementations were documented in LaTeX, and the (home-grown + commercial) tool chain worked with it quite nicely. Our process included maintaining design/implementation docs with the various component source code, etc. and requiring the engineers to maintain the docs for their parts. These small files could be integrated automatically into several distinct larger docs on demand, so LaTeX provided a lot of leverage for keeping documentation in sync with other parts of the development, build and delivery processes. There are numerous style files and extensions available that can be used to produce syntax diagrams and other special-purpose diagrams that are integrated into LaTeX source. We were also able to produce our own packages that supported things like diagrams of registers and other hardware components. This latter does, however, require that somebody (you perhaps :-) becomes a LaTeX and TeX expert. Our home-grown experts figured out TeX commands for trade marks and other logos and custom document styles. We also exploited the ability to write programs that analyzed system engineering docs, figured out things like requirements/design tracking matrices, and churned out LaTeX fragments for inclusion in documents; it *is* just ascii after all. -- Bill Wood
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Alex Casti wrote:
Hello. I'm running the Linux version 1.4.3 on Fedora
5 (64 bit). I'm having trouble with the usual tried
and true method of inserting references with BibTex.
My addition of citations seems to work fine when I
look at the lyx file itself, but the output to DVI or
PDF just gives [?] for the citations, and the
References section is blank.
Hi
I have been trying to get the bibtex referencing to work with a very
simple documents in Linux but my problems looks similar than described
here for the windows. Reference looks good when writing the text in Lyx,
but in the PDF document the references are replaced with [?].
I have myself tested both with the Mandriva 2007 and Debian Etch
(updated 2006.12.25 date) both using the Lyx 1.4.2
I have attached both of the example lyx documents, bibtex files and
generated pdf files as an attachment.
Mandriva 2007 Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test2.lyx
- ref.bif (created with kbibtex)
- test2.pdf
Debian Etch Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test.lyx
- master_thesis_ref.bib (created with gbib)
- test.pdf
My ultimate goal is to use lyx for writing my master thesis in a way
where the text would only show the references number ([3], [21], ...) and
in the end of the document would be a list of all referenced material
(sorted by using authors last name as a key)
I have attached the example files within this document in tar.bz2 package.
(also available from
http://aragorn.kortex.jyu.fi:8080/lyx_bibtex_problem.tar.bz2)
Here are also some of the output I am seeing in the Lyx console when
using Mandriva.
The top-level auxiliary file: test2.aux
The style file: plain.bst
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
:Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
I found no cite keys---while reading file test2.aux
Database file #1:
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
I was expecting a `,' or a `}'---line 1 of file
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
: @book{ Embedded
: Systems Architecture,
I'm skipping whatever remains of this entry
(There were 3 error messages)
OkCancelPolicy: No transition for input SMI_RESTORE from state INITIAL
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99c (Web2C 7.5.5)
The top-level auxiliary file: test.aux
White space in argument---line 2 of file test.aux
: \citation{Levy
:Steven Hackers}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
The style file: plain.bst
Mika
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on Lyx. For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² being displayed rather than the symbol. Any suggestions? My guess is I missed something in the configuration... -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. James On 12/27/06 4:26 PM, David L. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:07:26 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on Lyx. For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² being displayed rather than the symbol. I use LyX on (among others) an AMD-64 machine, and don't have this problem. What distribution/tex are you using? Oddly, on my system your quotes around the \nabla and \nabla appear to me as superscripted 3 and 2 (respectively), so possibly there is something unusual about your X fonts. If the dvi file prints properly, that is where I would suggest looking. -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi or pdf preview, and on paper. What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have installed? -- David L. Johnson __o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a _`\(,_ | conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw (_)/ (_) |
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS release 4 uname -srv gives: Linux 2.6.9-42.0.3.ELsmp #1 SMP Mon Sep 25 17:24:31 EDT 2006 Forgive my lack of Linux prowess, but I don't know what X fonts I have installed, or which latex package I am using. It is whatever comes as the default latex rpm for red-hat linux. James On 12/27/06 4:42 PM, David L. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing latex -version gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi or pdf preview, and on paper. What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have installed? -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
lamikr wrote:
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
: Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the argument
of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from Embedded Systems
Architecture to EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture, and you're done (I'm actually
surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
kbibtex author).
Jürgen
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
lamikr wrote:
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
:Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the
argument
of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from Embedded Systems
Architecture to EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture, and you're done (I'm actually
surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
kbibtex author).
That was it, thank you very much. Actually I need to fill a bug both to
the gbib and kbibtex as both of them allowed me to make the same mistake.
Would there be any changes that Lyx could catch errors like these and
give some kind of warning in a situations like this?
Mika
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 02:15, Stacia Hartleben wrote: > Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to answer and I > can't really find any posts about how exactly to use this great new > feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my Sanskrit assignment if I > can to test it out. I've tried it with both Sanskrit text and > Japanese, and both of them said this once I changed the encoding to > UTF8: > > Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set up for > use with LaTeX Unfortunately the support for utf8 encoding in LaTeX is rather incomplete, and some packages do not work with utf8 encoded files at all. Therefore it is not the default encoding for LaTeX output in LyX. > Umm, kind of funny that it's saying it doesn't know what the unicode > char is but then goes out and says what it is in the info. Indeed. > When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just has a > bunch of "undefined control sequence" errors. > > Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine into the > options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of "undefined control > sequence" stuff. If you want to help with this stuff you could put a simple test document (both for japanese and for sanskrit) into bugzilla. > I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the final > version makes this stuff a little more transparent for the user - I > wouldn't want to have to hack around with the preamble every time I > play with a new script. I hope so too, but the translation to LaTeX is not trivial. The first goal for 1.5.0 was to be able to output everything that 1.4. can output - that goal has almost been reached (with some minor problems with RTL languages that are currently discussed, and the CJK stuff is not integrated yet). We will see whether we will be able to do more in 1.5.0, or whether that comes in a later 1.5.x release. Georg
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
> "Stacia" == Stacia Hartleben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stacia> Hi, I addressed this in another mail but no one seemed to
Stacia> answer and I can't really find any posts about how exactly to
Stacia> use this great new feature in 1.5.0. I'd like to use it for my
Stacia> Sanskrit assignment if I can to test it out. I've tried it
Stacia> with both Sanskrit text and Japanese, and both of them said
Stacia> this once I changed the encoding to UTF8:
Stacia> Package inputenc Error: unicode char \u8: (character) not set
Stacia> up for use with LaTeX
Hello Stacia,
The problem is that utf8 output only works for latin and cyrillic
character set at LaTeX level. These are also the encodings that LyX is
able to handle currently as 8bit characters.
This means that support for non-european scripts still needs to be done.
Stacia> Then I tried putting \usepackage{ucs} in the preamble as I saw
Stacia> something about it in an old LyX post. Now it gives a
Stacia> different error message, but pretty much the same thing -
Stacia> Package ucs error: Unknown Unicode character 12399 = U+306F
Stacia> (for example with Japanese hiragana HA) Then it gives this in
Stacia> the info:
Interesting. I did not know this ucs.sty package. From what I read
here
http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/
I see that the author provides a ucs.sty package, and a utf8x.def
encoding definition. This seems to suggest that, if you use ucs.sty,
you should also use utf8x as encoding.
This requires more experimentation, of course.
Stacia> HIRAGANA LETTER HA Character available with following options:
Stacia> cjkjis. Enter I! to define the glyph.
Stacia> When I do put cjkjis in the options, it doesn't help, it just
Stacia> has a bunch of "undefined control sequence" errors.
Stacia> Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine
Stacia> into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of
Stacia> "undefined control sequence" stuff.
The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to
load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is
to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that
defines these entities is required.
Stacia> I know that 1.5.0 is in its alpha stages but I hope that the
Stacia> final version makes this stuff a little more transparent for
Stacia> the user - I wouldn't want to have to hack around with the
Stacia> preamble every time I play with a new script.
The fact is, nobody around here has deep understanding of non-latin
scripts. Therefore, we need some help to understand what output should
be generated for each type of script (and we need time/manpower to
implement it, too).
JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Stacia> Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine > Stacia> into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of > Stacia> "undefined control sequence" stuff. > > The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to > load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is > to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that > defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: changing section heading indentation
shawn fitzgibbons wrote:
> Is there a global setting that I
> can make in the preamble to make all headings {-3pc} into the left margin?
Have a look at the titlesec package that lets you customize the appearance and
placement of section headings:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/titlesec/
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I guess. I saw a Sanskrit package before which used Omega. I have no idea what omega or aleph are or how I could implement them in Windows, I'm afraid. I just use MikTex. What I use now is the velthuius package, but the downside to this is that I have to convert to latex and use a preprocessor on them. The UCS package is really technically and I can't quite figure it out. I think I may have to compile something using a perl script because there are a lot of tgz files, some of which have promising names like "devanagari". I'm pretty non-technical but I can give you the examples that I use to typeset Japanese and Sanskrit with now. I'm afraid I can't help you that much with other languages at the moment. On 12/27/06, Jürgen Spitzmüller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Stacia> Similar thing for Sanskrit - it whines about putting combine > Stacia> into the options, but when I do, it just gives me a bunch of > Stacia> "undefined control sequence" stuff. > > The documentation at the page above seems to say that you will need to > load the package that loads the macros. What ucs.sty package does is > to map unicode characters to latex entities. Then the package that > defines these entities is required. I've no experience in typesetting Sanskrit either, however, Google pointed me to this site that seems to have some basic information: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/coseru/unicode/ Seems that you'll need Omega (or its successor, Aleph) and the utf-skt package to typeset Sanskrit in unicode-LaTeX. For non-unicode-LaTeX, there's the sankrit package (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/sanskrit). Also, you might have some luck with XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex). Since it's developed by the SIL, I could imagine that Sanskrit is supported. As Jean-Marc wrote, if you can provide us with some more information on what is needed to typeset Sanskrit, we can try and intergrate that natively. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
> "Stacia" == Stacia Hartleben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Stacia> Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia> misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia> in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia> point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia> compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia> unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out? On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Stacia" == Stacia Hartleben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Stacia> Hi everyone thanks for your replies. It seems that I have Stacia> misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask Stacia> in all honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the Stacia> point of going through all this trouble to make LyX unicode Stacia> compatible if it well, doesn't work with the majority of Stacia> unicode text? The problem we had with our previous 8bit-based document model was that we had to hope that the user had entered its characters in an encoding which was the same as the one used by LaTeX. While this definitely allowed for nice hacks, it was not a very reasonable situation. A first step in the unicode transition is to support properly the encodings we used to support, that is basically european encodings. We should now be able to mix these in a document and obtain proper output. A second goal would be to integrate the cjk-lyx port and get proper support for cjk. This should not be too difficult since the code exists. I understand that this new code is a step back for knowledgeable people who created some neat hacks. Hopefully, we will be able to replace that with working code. Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. JMarc
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote: > It seems that I have > misunderstood the unicode direction for LyX 1.5.0 - can I ask in all > honesty and with no disrespect meant - what is the point of going > through all this trouble to make LyX unicode compatible if it well, > doesn't work with the majority of unicode text? For me the unicode > text displays in LyX fine (with a few quirks) so I was mislead I > guess. I guess the problem is that we have to face LaTeX's limitations. If some languages need extra packages even with unicode input encoding (to *output* unicode properly), we have to add support for those packages by and by. Unicode might be nice, but it cannot do magic. Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
Stacia Hartleben wrote:
> Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that out?
AFAIK this package is not maintained anymore and superseeded by the utf8 input
encoding integrated in the LaTeX base distribution
(i.e., \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}).
Jürgen
Re: tutorial on unicode for 1.5.0 svn?
> "Stacia" == Stacia Hartleben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Stacia> On 12/27/06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Something that is really missing now is code to be able to replace >> missing glyphs with the corresponding LaTeX macro. Stacia> Isn't that what the UCS package is for? Can anyone figure that Stacia> out? Since the ucs package is unmaintained by now, it may not be wise to rely on it. This is why having our own tables and/or rely on stable packages makes more sense IMO. JMarc
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Re: Replicating a document layout
Siterer Shawn Willden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > To use LyX to produce the sort of engineering/requirements > documentation used by my group, I need to see if I can find/produce a > document class that replicates the structure of our Word documents. I guess this could be done in several ways. The best and easiest in the long run would be to hire someone to craft a new LaTeX class, lyx layout and template. However, this would not be gratis and might be a bigger investment than you are willing to do at the moment. Therefore starting with something that are already supported in LyX and live with some changes and warts until you are committed to LyX may be the easiest and best starting point. Here are some tips from the top of my head... > The body of the documents are pretty standard section, subsection, > etc. structures with numbered headings. The mwrep document class that > comes with my copy of LyX (I'm using the current Debian unstable > package) is nearly perfect. It's a little annoying that the top-level > sections are called "Chapters" and that they're unnumbered in LyX, > but the output is exactly right. AFAIK mwrep is a style made for the polish market and the documentation is in polish which makes it a bit difficult to use for people that do not read polish... Have you tried koma-skript article ? It has a lot more options out of the box, but might not have the look you want ? Read more on koma-script here: ftp://tug.ctan.org/pub/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/koma-script/scrguien.pdf To get numbered sections and subsection adjust the slider in Documents->setting->numbering & TOC > The main part of that document class that requires customization is > the title page and we need footers. > Each page also needs a footer, containing the file name, page number > (e.g. "Page n of m"), version number and last revision date. > > Would it be difficult to make something like this? Is there something > out there that's close that I could use as a starting point? I cant see anything impossible in what you have described above. Try to find a LaTeX class that have as much of the look you want as possible, but even more important, probably, that it can do what you want and I would again say that koma-script is good :). Another tip is that the label do not matter that much, institute can become copyright statement or document owner if it looks right on paper. And in LyX you can change the name from institute to copyright statement by changing the layout file. If you need to include some changes to the look of a class this is usually possible by adding some LaTeX to the preamble, this can then either be hidden in the layoutfile or in the template file... You can also remove styles from the layoutfile that are not used to make it even more userfriendly. Well, as I said, some pointers to get you started. Do not hesitate to ask questions if you have some questions. Ingar PS do not forget to read the help->Customization chapter 5. --
Re: Using LyX for design documentation
On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 09:13 -0700, Shawn Willden wrote: > I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and > I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and > recommendations for packages that might help. > > We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word > documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't > have to describe to the readership of this list. > > The advantages I see to using LyX are: > > More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows > people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people > actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea > how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent > layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). > Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. > Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even > merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. > Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to > spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from > fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will > significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Shawn, unfurtunately I can't supply any detailed help since I've been away from using LaTeX for awhile and I'm just starting to use Lyx. I can tell you, however, the LaTeX *can* be used successfully for design documentation. A company that I used to work for used LaTeX for all the support docs for a special-purpose computer and associated OS. Both hardware and software designs and implementations were documented in LaTeX, and the (home-grown + commercial) tool chain worked with it quite nicely. Our process included maintaining design/implementation docs with the various component source code, etc. and requiring the engineers to maintain the docs for their parts. These small files could be integrated automatically into several distinct larger docs on demand, so LaTeX provided a lot of leverage for keeping documentation in sync with other parts of the development, build and delivery processes. There are numerous style files and extensions available that can be used to produce syntax diagrams and other special-purpose diagrams that are integrated into LaTeX source. We were also able to produce our own packages that supported things like diagrams of registers and other hardware components. This latter does, however, require that somebody (you perhaps :-) becomes a LaTeX and TeX expert. Our home-grown experts figured out TeX commands for trade marks and other logos and custom document styles. We also exploited the ability to write programs that analyzed system engineering docs, figured out things like requirements/design tracking matrices, and churned out LaTeX fragments for inclusion in documents; it *is* just ascii after all. -- Bill Wood
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Alex Casti wrote:
> Hello. I'm running the Linux version 1.4.3 on Fedora
> 5 (64 bit). I'm having trouble with the usual tried
> and true method of inserting references with BibTex.
> My addition of citations seems to work fine when I
> look at the lyx file itself, but the output to DVI or
> PDF just gives [?] for the citations, and the
> References section is blank.
>
Hi
I have been trying to get the bibtex referencing to work with a very
simple documents in Linux but my problems looks similar than described
here for the windows. Reference looks good when writing the text in Lyx,
but in the PDF document the references are replaced with [?].
I have myself tested both with the Mandriva 2007 and Debian Etch
(updated 2006.12.25 date) both using the Lyx 1.4.2
I have attached both of the example lyx documents, bibtex files and
generated pdf files as an attachment.
Mandriva 2007 Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test2.lyx
- ref.bif (created with kbibtex)
- test2.pdf
Debian Etch Test with Lyx 1.4.2
-
- test.lyx
- master_thesis_ref.bib (created with gbib)
- test.pdf
My ultimate goal is to use lyx for writing my master thesis in a way
where the text would only show the references number ([3], [21], ...) and
in the end of the document would be a list of all referenced material
(sorted by using authors last name as a key)
I have attached the example files within this document in tar.bz2 package.
(also available from
http://aragorn.kortex.jyu.fi:8080/lyx_bibtex_problem.tar.bz2)
Here are also some of the output I am seeing in the Lyx console when
using Mandriva.
The top-level auxiliary file: test2.aux
The style file: plain.bst
White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
: \citation{Embedded
:Systems Architecture}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
I found no cite keys---while reading file test2.aux
Database file #1:
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
I was expecting a `,' or a `}'---line 1 of file
0_home_lamikr_own_h6300_docs_writings_master_thesis_1_ref.bib
: @book{ Embedded
: Systems Architecture,
I'm skipping whatever remains of this entry
(There were 3 error messages)
OkCancelPolicy: No transition for input SMI_RESTORE from state INITIAL
This is BibTeX, Version 0.99c (Web2C 7.5.5)
The top-level auxiliary file: test.aux
White space in argument---line 2 of file test.aux
: \citation{Levy
:Steven Hackers}
I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
The style file: plain.bst
Mika
Using LyX for design documentation
I'm looking into the possibility of using LyX for design documentation, and I'd like to get some feedback on the feasibility of what I'd like to do, and recommendations for packages that might help. We currently manage all of our design documentation as Microsoft Word documents. There are numerous problems with this, which I probably don't have to describe to the readership of this list. The advantages I see to using LyX are: More standardized output. We have Word templates, but obviously Word allows people to munge the doc however they like and, frankly, very few people actually know how to use Word, so they tend to screw things up with no idea how to fix it. I think an appropriate document class can provide consistent layout and formatting (though I'm a raw novice with LyX and LaTeX). Prettier, more readable output. LaTeX just produces better results than Word. Better change management. We can put our documents in CVS! And perhaps even merge changes from parallel work streams, etc. Easier document creation/editing. Word is a PITA to use, and people tend to spend lots of time tweaking things. I think separating text entry from fiddling with formatting (and making fiddling with formatting hard) will significantly reduce time spent on documentation. Those are my theories. Comments are appreciated. The disadvantages I see are: Everyone knows Word -- or thinks they do -- and they're going to be somewhat reluctant to change. If there are any difficulties or obstacles, they won't want to do it. It may not be feasible for a novice like me to produce a document class that provides the layout we want. My thinking is that the way to address the first disadvantage is to provide them with a document class that makes the documents very easy to produce, with zero formatting fiddling required. Unfortunately, that exacerbates the second disadvantage, unless, perhaps, someone else already has something which is very close to what we need? I'll address the specifics of the format we're looking for in a separate e-mail. All comments about experiences with similar uses of LyX are highly appreciated. Thanks, Shawn.
Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on Lyx. For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² being displayed rather than the symbol. Any suggestions? My guess is I missed something in the configuration... -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
I am running Lyx 1.4.3. Typing "latex -version" gives TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 kpathsea version 3.4.5 As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter \nabla in a math environment, I get nabla in red font. James On 12/27/06 4:26 PM, "David L. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:07:26 -0700 > James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I built lyx on a x86-64 linux machine and the equations are not displayed >> properly. They compile into DVI just fine, but don¹t display properly on >> Lyx. >> >> For example, typing ³\nabla² into a math environment results in ³nabla² >> being displayed rather than the symbol. > > I use LyX on (among others) an AMD-64 machine, and don't have this problem. > What distribution/tex are you using? > > Oddly, on my system your quotes around the \nabla and \nabla appear to me as > superscripted 3 and 2 (respectively), so possibly there is something unusual > about your X fonts. If the dvi file prints properly, that is where I would > suggest looking. -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am running Lyx 1.4.3. > > Typing "latex -version" gives > TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 > kpathsea version 3.4.5 > > As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the > nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter > \nabla > in a math environment, I get > nabla > in red font. Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi or pdf preview, and on paper. What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have installed? -- David L. Johnson __o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a _`\(,_ | conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw (_)/ (_) |
Re: Equations display improperly on x86-64 linux build
OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS release 4 uname -srv gives: Linux 2.6.9-42.0.3.ELsmp #1 SMP Mon Sep 25 17:24:31 EDT 2006 Forgive my lack of Linux prowess, but I don't know what X fonts I have installed, or which latex package I am using. It is whatever comes as the default latex rpm for red-hat linux. James On 12/27/06 4:42 PM, "David L. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:32:36 -0700 > James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I am running Lyx 1.4.3. >> >> Typing "latex -version" gives >> TeX (Web2C 7.4.5) 3.14159 >> kpathsea version 3.4.5 >> >> As a point of clarification, I didn't explicitly enter quotes around the >> nabla operator. Specifically, if I enter >> \nabla >> in a math environment, I get >> nabla >> in red font. > > Right. But you put quotes (or something) around the \nabla and nabla you > entered into your e-mail message, and those are not displaying properly on my > (linux) computer. The nabla in red within LyX should show up properly in dvi > or pdf preview, and on paper. > > What I am suggesting is that your X fonts are missing the symbol fonts that > LyX uses (help, experts, with font names if you know them). I get the same > effect when using my zaurus pda (which has lyx-1.3.6 or so and latex). > > So, again, which OS are you using on your machine (specific distribution), > and which package, if you are using a standard package, of latex (typically, > it would be tetex or texlive (my favorite)). What X fonts do you have > installed? -- James C. Sutherland Assistant Professor Department of Chemical Engineering University of Utah (801) 585-1246
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
lamikr wrote:
> White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
> : \citation{Embedded
> : Systems Architecture}
> I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the argument
of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from "Embedded Systems
Architecture" to "EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture", and you're done (I'm actually
surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
kbibtex author).
Jürgen
Re: BibTex problem with Lyx 1.4.3
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> lamikr wrote:
>
>> White space in argument---line 4 of file test2.aux
>> : \citation{Embedded
>> :Systems Architecture}
>> I'm skipping whatever remains of this command
>>
>
> As the error message states: you are using invalid white space in the
> argument
> of the citation entry. Change the bibliography key from "Embedded Systems
> Architecture" to "EmbeddedSystemsArchitecture", and you're done (I'm actually
> surprised that kbibtex lets you create such a key; pybliographer here
> complains that it is invalid; I'd suggest to write a big report to the
> kbibtex author).
>
That was it, thank you very much. Actually I need to fill a bug both to
the gbib and kbibtex as both of them allowed me to make the same mistake.
Would there be any changes that Lyx could catch errors like these and
give some kind of warning in a situations like this?
Mika
