Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Yeah! And to prove this statement I've attached some examples.

I couldn't open your attachment with 7zip on Windows.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Yeah! And to prove this statement I've attached some examples.

I couldn't open your attachment with 7zip on Windows.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Yeah! And to prove this statement I've attached some examples.

I couldn't open your attachment with 7zip on Windows.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

 That looks beautiful. AS I have no idea how python works, co-author
 would probably better.

Python is the best scripting (and general purpose programming) language
ever invented. Not only for scientists. 

If you're using a computer intensively to earn your living, you *should*
learn it. Otherwise you're missing *something*, in terms of
productivity you can achieve.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

 That looks beautiful. AS I have no idea how python works, co-author
 would probably better.

Python is the best scripting (and general purpose programming) language
ever invented. Not only for scientists. 

If you're using a computer intensively to earn your living, you *should*
learn it. Otherwise you're missing *something*, in terms of
productivity you can achieve.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Python Graphics in LyX [was: Python bindings]

[Wolfgang Keller]

> That looks beautiful. AS I have no idea how python works, co-author
> would probably better.

Python is the best scripting (and general purpose programming) language
ever invented. Not only for scientists. 

If you're using a computer intensively to earn your living, you *should*
learn it. Otherwise you're missing *something*, in terms of
productivity you can achieve.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [ANNOUNCE] LyX 2.1.0 Released

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Should you experience any difficulties, please
 send an email to the user list (lyx-users@lists.lyx.org), the
 development list (lyx-de...@lists.lyx.org), or file a bug report 
 (http://www.lyx.org/trac/wiki/BugTrackerHome).

The installer LyX-2.1.0-Installer-2.exe seems to be flawed. It wants to
install dictionaries and thesauri for bulkloads of languages that I
don't need and I can't un-select them in the listbox.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [ANNOUNCE] LyX 2.1.0 Released

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Should you experience any difficulties, please
 send an email to the user list (lyx-users@lists.lyx.org), the
 development list (lyx-de...@lists.lyx.org), or file a bug report 
 (http://www.lyx.org/trac/wiki/BugTrackerHome).

The installer LyX-2.1.0-Installer-2.exe seems to be flawed. It wants to
install dictionaries and thesauri for bulkloads of languages that I
don't need and I can't un-select them in the listbox.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [ANNOUNCE] LyX 2.1.0 Released

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Should you experience any difficulties, please
> send an email to the user list (lyx-users@lists.lyx.org), the
> development list (lyx-de...@lists.lyx.org), or file a bug report 
> (http://www.lyx.org/trac/wiki/BugTrackerHome).

The installer LyX-2.1.0-Installer-2.exe seems to be flawed. It wants to
install dictionaries and thesauri for bulkloads of languages that I
don't need and I can't un-select them in the listbox.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Thanks, I was not aware of that LyTeX is still alive.
 Apparently this version writes something to the registry (this can
 also be done by portable versions). However, I wonder that they
 provided a beta version as portable LyTeX

They don't, at least not for me.

I installed the version they had years ago and since then I have
always only overwritten the LyX subfolder with the installers that I
have downloaded from ftp.lyx.org without using the updater included
in LyTeX. And in parallel I have kept the TeXLive subfolder updated with
the TexLive package manager as well. Has worked perfectly across
releases.

Probably the only thing that's still left from the original LyTeX (must
have been 1.6.x back then) is the folder structure and the startupt
script.

  This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX
  2.1rc1 over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry.
 
  There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have
  authorisation to write to the registry on this computer.
 
 You always have the right to write to the registry section
 HKey_Current_User.

On this computer, all transient entries there should get erased upon
startup.

Yes, they are that sadistic.
 
  Which is a restriction that's just as compulsive and imperious as
  those idiotic installers are. Seems the most important concern of
  certain people is to prevent others from being able to do their
  work.
 
 I don't understand. The LyX installer allows you to install LyX also
 if you only have a guest account on a PC.
 However, if your Admin denies to allow you to install things, he has
 a reason. So better blame him.

He doesn't have a reason. I know - way - more about computer security
than him.

(Which is not difficult, all Windows administrators I have met so far
were hopelessly clueless morons.)

It's just a professional sickness. IT administrators compulsively lock
down the computers beyond uselessness (to the point that ever more
often bring your own is the only way to get anything done any more),
software developers/packagers compulsively require running pointless
installers, and in between, like punchbags are caught those people
who have to get the actual productive work done. 

  Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
  uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
  LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
  upgrade is not possible).
 
  A dumb installer would simply overwrite the previous installation
 
 As aid, this is in case of beta releases no feature. We are only a
 small group of developers. Providing also full support for beta
 versions would cost us a lot time we don't have. 

I am not asking for that. I keep a backup of the last known working LyX
subfolder I have.

So if anything doesn't work, I'll just sent a corresponding rant to the
list and roll back.

 And don't forget we all have a private life and a job - we develop
 LyX in our spare time!

I don't have a private life. Among others, thanks to the obscene
absurdities of modern office work environments where all kinds of
fat tapeworms wag with us dogs.
 
  Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug
  but there is no reason to be abusive!
 
  I guess that implementing the check function is an extra effort to
  make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* added
  value from this function (actually a refusal to provide a
  required function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether
  LyX is already installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.
 
 This can destroy your LyX settings so that it can become unusable.

It won't destroy anything that I can't roll back by simply trashing
the LyX subfolder that's kaputt and by replacing it with the last
known working version.

That is *one* of the *many* advantages of installer-free application
distribution.

No need for installers, no need for uninstallers, backups are trivial
and so are rollbacks.

This principle of application distribution has been known and
perfectly working at least since 1984 (Atari TOS, MacOS, a little later
of Acorn RiscOS, I don't know about AmigaOS).

Unlike installers, which have *never* actually worked reliably.

  Just like installers (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
  User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
  archives. And the Windows registry is only good as an open barn
  door for viruses, trojans and other malware.
 
 Oha, I now fully understand your Admin that you are not allowed to
 install programs.

No computer for that I have ever had the personal reponsibility (and
over that I had full authority) has ever contracted a single virus or
other malware in 25 years.

The only occasions when a computer that I had to use got a virus were
the usual, well known barn doors, that were wide opened by the choice
of OS, applications and by the configuration that was locked down by
the administrictator, so that I couldn't even 

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Thanks, I was not aware of that LyTeX is still alive.
 Apparently this version writes something to the registry (this can
 also be done by portable versions). However, I wonder that they
 provided a beta version as portable LyTeX

They don't, at least not for me.

I installed the version they had years ago and since then I have
always only overwritten the LyX subfolder with the installers that I
have downloaded from ftp.lyx.org without using the updater included
in LyTeX. And in parallel I have kept the TeXLive subfolder updated with
the TexLive package manager as well. Has worked perfectly across
releases.

Probably the only thing that's still left from the original LyTeX (must
have been 1.6.x back then) is the folder structure and the startupt
script.

  This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX
  2.1rc1 over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry.
 
  There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have
  authorisation to write to the registry on this computer.
 
 You always have the right to write to the registry section
 HKey_Current_User.

On this computer, all transient entries there should get erased upon
startup.

Yes, they are that sadistic.
 
  Which is a restriction that's just as compulsive and imperious as
  those idiotic installers are. Seems the most important concern of
  certain people is to prevent others from being able to do their
  work.
 
 I don't understand. The LyX installer allows you to install LyX also
 if you only have a guest account on a PC.
 However, if your Admin denies to allow you to install things, he has
 a reason. So better blame him.

He doesn't have a reason. I know - way - more about computer security
than him.

(Which is not difficult, all Windows administrators I have met so far
were hopelessly clueless morons.)

It's just a professional sickness. IT administrators compulsively lock
down the computers beyond uselessness (to the point that ever more
often bring your own is the only way to get anything done any more),
software developers/packagers compulsively require running pointless
installers, and in between, like punchbags are caught those people
who have to get the actual productive work done. 

  Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
  uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
  LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
  upgrade is not possible).
 
  A dumb installer would simply overwrite the previous installation
 
 As aid, this is in case of beta releases no feature. We are only a
 small group of developers. Providing also full support for beta
 versions would cost us a lot time we don't have. 

I am not asking for that. I keep a backup of the last known working LyX
subfolder I have.

So if anything doesn't work, I'll just sent a corresponding rant to the
list and roll back.

 And don't forget we all have a private life and a job - we develop
 LyX in our spare time!

I don't have a private life. Among others, thanks to the obscene
absurdities of modern office work environments where all kinds of
fat tapeworms wag with us dogs.
 
  Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug
  but there is no reason to be abusive!
 
  I guess that implementing the check function is an extra effort to
  make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* added
  value from this function (actually a refusal to provide a
  required function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether
  LyX is already installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.
 
 This can destroy your LyX settings so that it can become unusable.

It won't destroy anything that I can't roll back by simply trashing
the LyX subfolder that's kaputt and by replacing it with the last
known working version.

That is *one* of the *many* advantages of installer-free application
distribution.

No need for installers, no need for uninstallers, backups are trivial
and so are rollbacks.

This principle of application distribution has been known and
perfectly working at least since 1984 (Atari TOS, MacOS, a little later
of Acorn RiscOS, I don't know about AmigaOS).

Unlike installers, which have *never* actually worked reliably.

  Just like installers (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
  User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
  archives. And the Windows registry is only good as an open barn
  door for viruses, trojans and other malware.
 
 Oha, I now fully understand your Admin that you are not allowed to
 install programs.

No computer for that I have ever had the personal reponsibility (and
over that I had full authority) has ever contracted a single virus or
other malware in 25 years.

The only occasions when a computer that I had to use got a virus were
the usual, well known barn doors, that were wide opened by the choice
of OS, applications and by the configuration that was locked down by
the administrictator, so that I couldn't even 

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Thanks, I was not aware of that LyTeX is still alive.
> Apparently this version writes something to the registry (this can
> also be done by portable versions). However, I wonder that they
> provided a beta version as portable LyTeX

They don't, at least not for me.

I installed the version they had years ago and since then I have
always only overwritten the LyX subfolder with the installers that I
have downloaded from ftp.lyx.org without using the "updater" included
in LyTeX. And in parallel I have kept the TeXLive subfolder updated with
the TexLive package manager as well. Has worked perfectly across
releases.

Probably the only thing that's still left from the original LyTeX (must
have been 1.6.x back then) is the folder structure and the startupt
script.

> >> This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX
> >> 2.1rc1 over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry.
> >
> > There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have
> > authorisation to write to the registry on this computer.
> 
> You always have the right to write to the registry section
> "HKey_Current_User".

On this computer, all "transient" entries there should get erased upon
startup.

Yes, they are that sadistic.
 
> > Which is a restriction that's just as compulsive and imperious as
> > those idiotic installers are. Seems the most important concern of
> > certain people is to prevent others from being able to do their
> > work.
> 
> I don't understand. The LyX installer allows you to install LyX also
> if you only have a guest account on a PC.
> However, if your Admin denies to allow you to install things, he has
> a reason. So better blame him.

He doesn't have a reason. I know - way - more about computer security
than him.

(Which is not difficult, all Windows "administrators" I have met so far
were hopelessly clueless morons.)

It's just a professional sickness. IT "administrators" compulsively lock
down the computers beyond uselessness (to the point that ever more
often "bring your own" is the only way to get anything done any more),
software developers/packagers compulsively require running pointless
"installers", and in between, like punchbags are caught those people
who have to get the actual productive work done. 

> >> Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
> >> uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
> >> LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
> >> upgrade is not possible).
> >
> > A "dumb" installer would simply overwrite the previous installation
> 
> As aid, this is in case of beta releases no feature. We are only a
> small group of developers. Providing also full support for beta
> versions would cost us a lot time we don't have. 

I am not asking for that. I keep a backup of the last known working LyX
subfolder I have.

So if anything doesn't work, I'll just sent a corresponding rant to the
list and "roll back".

> And don't forget we all have a private life and a job - we develop
> LyX in our spare time!

I don't have a private life. Among others, thanks to the obscene
absurdities of modern office "work" environments where all kinds of
fat tapeworms wag with us dogs.
 
> >> Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug
> >> but there is no reason to be abusive!
> >
> > I guess that implementing the "check" function is an extra effort to
> > make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* "added
> > value" from this "function" (actually a refusal to provide a
> > required function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether
> > LyX is already installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.
> 
> This can destroy your LyX settings so that it can become unusable.

It won't destroy anything that I can't roll back by simply trashing
the LyX subfolder that's "kaputt" and by replacing it with the last
known working version.

That is *one* of the *many* advantages of installer-free application
distribution.

No need for installers, no need for uninstallers, backups are trivial
and so are "rollbacks".

This principle of application distribution has been known and
perfectly working at least since 1984 (Atari TOS, MacOS, a little later
of Acorn RiscOS, I don't know about AmigaOS).

Unlike "installers", which have *never* actually worked reliably.

> > Just like "installers" (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
> > User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
> > archives. And the Windows "registry" is only good as an open barn
> > door for viruses, trojans and other malware.
> 
> Oha, I now fully understand your Admin that you are not allowed to
> install programs.

No computer for that I have ever had the personal reponsibility (and
over that I had full authority) has ever contracted a single virus or
other "malware" in 25 years.

The only occasions when a computer that I had to use got a virus were
the usual, well known barn doors, that were wide opened by the 

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

  LyX is already installed.
  Please uninstall LyX first.
 
  WTF?!
 
  First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
  installed. I use it in portable mode.
 
 Can you give me more information please. What LyX version are you
 using?

LyX Version 2.1.0beta2
(Sonntag, 10. November 2013)

 From where did you get the portable LyX?

It was called LyTeX, and I have been using it since well before 2.0,
the download location has moved since and the software has been updated.
And I'm using it with TeXLive of course, not with MikTeX like the
version that is now available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/lytex/.
 
 This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX 2.1rc1
 over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry. 

There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have authorisation
to write to the registry on this computer. Which is a restriction
that's just as compulsive and imperious as those idiotic installers
are. Seems the most important concern of certain people is to prevent
others from being able to do their work.

 Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
 uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
 LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
 upgrade is not possible).

A dumb installer would simply overwrite the previous installation and
that would be the thing to do. Yes, I do make a backup of the working
LyX before I overwrite it.
 
  Second, what's that bullshittish idea
 
 Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug but
 there is no reason to be abusive!

I guess that implementing the check function is an extra effort to
make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* added
value from this function (actually a refusal to provide a required
function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether LyX is already
installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.

Looks like someone wanted to be extra-smart, but this only prevents
people from being able to do what they need to do. Which, to me, is
compulsive, imperious and totally braindead, if you prefer these
adjectives to bullshittish.

Just like installers (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
archives. And the Windows registry is only good as an open barn door
for viruses, trojans and other malware.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

  LyX is already installed.
  Please uninstall LyX first.
 
  WTF?!
 
  First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
  installed. I use it in portable mode.
 
 Can you give me more information please. What LyX version are you
 using?

LyX Version 2.1.0beta2
(Sonntag, 10. November 2013)

 From where did you get the portable LyX?

It was called LyTeX, and I have been using it since well before 2.0,
the download location has moved since and the software has been updated.
And I'm using it with TeXLive of course, not with MikTeX like the
version that is now available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/lytex/.
 
 This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX 2.1rc1
 over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry. 

There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have authorisation
to write to the registry on this computer. Which is a restriction
that's just as compulsive and imperious as those idiotic installers
are. Seems the most important concern of certain people is to prevent
others from being able to do their work.

 Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
 uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
 LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
 upgrade is not possible).

A dumb installer would simply overwrite the previous installation and
that would be the thing to do. Yes, I do make a backup of the working
LyX before I overwrite it.
 
  Second, what's that bullshittish idea
 
 Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug but
 there is no reason to be abusive!

I guess that implementing the check function is an extra effort to
make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* added
value from this function (actually a refusal to provide a required
function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether LyX is already
installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.

Looks like someone wanted to be extra-smart, but this only prevents
people from being able to do what they need to do. Which, to me, is
compulsive, imperious and totally braindead, if you prefer these
adjectives to bullshittish.

Just like installers (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
archives. And the Windows registry is only good as an open barn door
for viruses, trojans and other malware.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > LyX is already installed.
> > Please uninstall LyX first.
> >
> > WTF?!
> >
> > First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
> > "installed". I use it in portable mode.
> 
> Can you give me more information please. What LyX version are you
> using?

LyX Version 2.1.0beta2
(Sonntag, 10. November 2013)

> From where did you get the portable LyX?

It was called LyTeX, and I have been using it since well before 2.0,
the download location has moved since and the software has been updated.
And I'm using it with TeXLive of course, not with MikTeX like the
version that is now available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/lytex/.
 
> This error message should only occur if you try to install LyX 2.1rc1
> over LyX 2.1rc1. This is checked by the Windows registry. 

There can be nothing in the registry, since I don't have authorisation
to write to the registry on this computer. Which is a restriction
that's just as compulsive and imperious as those idiotic installers
are. Seems the most important concern of certain people is to prevent
others from being able to do their work.

> Hmm, or did you once installed LyX 2.1beta? If so you must
> uninstall LyX 2.1beta first (these were testing releases (for
> LyX-only not the installer nor LyX's dependencies) so that an easy
> upgrade is not possible).

A "dumb" installer would simply overwrite the previous installation and
that would be the thing to do. Yes, I do make a backup of the "working"
LyX before I overwrite it.
 
> > Second, what's that bullshittish idea
> 
> Could you please be a bit more polite. You apparently found a bug but
> there is no reason to be abusive!

I guess that implementing the "check" function is an extra effort to
make, which is totally pointless imho. I see exactly *zero* "added
value" from this "function" (actually a refusal to provide a required
function). The installer just shouldn't care for whether LyX is already
installed or not and overwrite everything, basta.

Looks like someone wanted to be extra-smart, but this only prevents
people from being able to do what they need to do. Which, to me, is
compulsive, imperious and totally braindead, if you prefer these
adjectives to "bullshittish".

Just like "installers" (resp. software requiring those) are anyway.
User-friendly software has to be packaged as simple zero-install zip
archives. And the Windows "registry" is only good as an open barn door
for viruses, trojans and other malware.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 You can download LyX 2.1.0rc1 from ftp://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/.
 
 We hope you will enjoy the result!

LyX is already installed.
Please uninstall LyX first.

WTF?!

First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
installed. I use it in portable mode.

Second, what's that bullshittish idea that I must not update an
existing (working) installation?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 You can download LyX 2.1.0rc1 from ftp://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/.
 
 We hope you will enjoy the result!

LyX is already installed.
Please uninstall LyX first.

WTF?!

First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
installed. I use it in portable mode.

Second, what's that bullshittish idea that I must not update an
existing (working) installation?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: ANNOUNCE: LyX version 2.1.0 (rc1)

[Wolfgang Keller]

> You can download LyX 2.1.0rc1 from ftp://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/.
> 
> We hope you will enjoy the result!

LyX is already installed.
Please uninstall LyX first.

WTF?!

First, this error message is *wrong*, since I don't have LyX
"installed". I use it in portable mode.

Second, what's that bullshittish idea that I must not update an
existing (working) installation?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX freezes periodically

[Wolfgang Keller]

  When working on a specific large document (about 50 pages as a PDF),
  LyX does a very annoying thing where it freezes for about 4-5
  seconds about once a minute. 

Can you switch to other running applications during those 4-5 seconds?
Are those applications responsive or are they frozen, too?
 
 Now *that's* a pain in the ass!

Duh!

Have you ever tried to work with Windows? It's normal there. With *any*
application.

Cause (on Windows): Some background process (virus scanner, file system
indexer) doing I/O, which in turn makes Windows turn back to
(non-)cooperative multitasking, i.e. until the background process
releases some system-wide lock, the whole system freezes.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX freezes periodically

[Wolfgang Keller]

  When working on a specific large document (about 50 pages as a PDF),
  LyX does a very annoying thing where it freezes for about 4-5
  seconds about once a minute. 

Can you switch to other running applications during those 4-5 seconds?
Are those applications responsive or are they frozen, too?
 
 Now *that's* a pain in the ass!

Duh!

Have you ever tried to work with Windows? It's normal there. With *any*
application.

Cause (on Windows): Some background process (virus scanner, file system
indexer) doing I/O, which in turn makes Windows turn back to
(non-)cooperative multitasking, i.e. until the background process
releases some system-wide lock, the whole system freezes.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX freezes periodically

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > When working on a specific large document (about 50 pages as a PDF),
> > LyX does a very annoying thing where it freezes for about 4-5
> > seconds about once a minute. 

Can you switch to other running applications during those 4-5 seconds?
Are those applications responsive or are they frozen, too?
 
> Now *that's* a pain in the ass!

Duh!

Have you ever tried to work with Windows? It's normal there. With *any*
application.

Cause (on Windows): Some background process (virus scanner, file system
indexer) doing I/O, which in turn makes Windows turn back to
(non-)"cooperative" multitasking, i.e. until the background process
releases some system-wide "lock", the whole system freezes.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Lyx - Reviewed at www.ilovefreesoftware.com

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I am Arun from www.ilovefreesoftware.com. We recently reviewed Lyx on
 our website here:

And it seems that you've missed the *essential* distinctive advantages
of LyX/LaTeX such as 

- structure markup (instead of finger painting)
- typographic quality of the (PDF) output

SIncerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Lyx - Reviewed at www.ilovefreesoftware.com

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I am Arun from www.ilovefreesoftware.com. We recently reviewed Lyx on
 our website here:

And it seems that you've missed the *essential* distinctive advantages
of LyX/LaTeX such as 

- structure markup (instead of finger painting)
- typographic quality of the (PDF) output

SIncerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Lyx - Reviewed at www.ilovefreesoftware.com

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I am Arun from www.ilovefreesoftware.com. We recently reviewed Lyx on
> our website here:

And it seems that you've missed the *essential* distinctive advantages
of LyX/LaTeX such as 

- structure markup (instead of "finger painting")
- typographic quality of the (PDF) output

SIncerely,

Wolfgang

Re: why people give up on open source software

[Wolfgang Keller]

 You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download
 and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally
 state, AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
 PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Its usually printed all or in part in all
 captial letters.

And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN
UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT.
 
;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: why people give up on open source software

[Wolfgang Keller]

 You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download
 and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally
 state, AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
 PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Its usually printed all or in part in all
 captial letters.

And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN
UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT.
 
;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: why people give up on open source software

[Wolfgang Keller]

> You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download
> and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally
> state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
> PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all
> captial letters.

And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN
UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT.
 
>;->

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question #3: LyX and LaTeX and TeX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 LyX strives to offer an authoring environment that requires no (or
 truly minimal) knowledge of LaTeX. 

And this feature is pretty foolproof.

As proven by this fool. ;-

 In practice, however, rudimentary LaTeX knowledge is always required
 when working with LyX,

You can learn all that from the manuals while authoring your first
document with LyX. I did it exactly that way myself.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question #3: LyX and LaTeX and TeX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 LyX strives to offer an authoring environment that requires no (or
 truly minimal) knowledge of LaTeX. 

And this feature is pretty foolproof.

As proven by this fool. ;-

 In practice, however, rudimentary LaTeX knowledge is always required
 when working with LyX,

You can learn all that from the manuals while authoring your first
document with LyX. I did it exactly that way myself.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question #3: LyX and LaTeX and TeX

[Wolfgang Keller]

> LyX strives to offer an authoring environment that requires no (or
> truly minimal) knowledge of LaTeX. 

And this feature is pretty foolproof.

As proven by this fool. >;->

> In practice, however, rudimentary LaTeX knowledge is always required
> when working with LyX,

You can learn all that from the manuals while authoring your first
document with LyX. I did it exactly that way myself.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 The new (4.0 IIRC) version of LibreOffice had problems on the Mac 

I'm at 4.1.

But I don't have a clue of its math support, since I wouldn't use it
for writing documents anyway.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: OT: polychromatic fonts

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Today I read about Microsoft planning to unleash polychromatic fonts
 on the world. What do you make of them? As far as I can see, they're
 an ungodly monstrosity:
 http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2013/08/polychromatic-digital-type

What does MS know of typography.

It took them something like 25 years (until Windows Vista?) to
understand that *screen* fonts must be designed specifically for
readability *on screen*.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Version 1.0.0 of the software was released in 1999. 
 by the way, in Tübingen, my home town

braggard

And it's hosted at one of my almae matres.

At least the FTP server.

/braggard

;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

   And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so.
 
  The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
  than 10 years ago.
 
That was a typo and should have been 15, as the original message said.

I know Lyrix was implemented first using XForms some time late in the
90s, but it must have been after 1995.

And I didn't really consider it as usable around 1998, when I tried it
the first time. Neither Scientific Workplace, which I tried as well at
that time. I stuck with Framemaker back then.
 
 Way earlier than that. I switched to Lyx after I completed my
 dissertation (which I wrote in Framemaker, on a NeXt cube. Boy am I
 old!).

Topper

That's nothing.

Framemaker? NeXt? Pampered upperclass brat.

Remember Wordstar (don't know which version) on plain MS DOS?

/Topper

;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 The new (4.0 IIRC) version of LibreOffice had problems on the Mac 

I'm at 4.1.

But I don't have a clue of its math support, since I wouldn't use it
for writing documents anyway.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: OT: polychromatic fonts

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Today I read about Microsoft planning to unleash polychromatic fonts
 on the world. What do you make of them? As far as I can see, they're
 an ungodly monstrosity:
 http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2013/08/polychromatic-digital-type

What does MS know of typography.

It took them something like 25 years (until Windows Vista?) to
understand that *screen* fonts must be designed specifically for
readability *on screen*.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Version 1.0.0 of the software was released in 1999. 
 by the way, in Tübingen, my home town

braggard

And it's hosted at one of my almae matres.

At least the FTP server.

/braggard

;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

   And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so.
 
  The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
  than 10 years ago.
 
That was a typo and should have been 15, as the original message said.

I know Lyrix was implemented first using XForms some time late in the
90s, but it must have been after 1995.

And I didn't really consider it as usable around 1998, when I tried it
the first time. Neither Scientific Workplace, which I tried as well at
that time. I stuck with Framemaker back then.
 
 Way earlier than that. I switched to Lyx after I completed my
 dissertation (which I wrote in Framemaker, on a NeXt cube. Boy am I
 old!).

Topper

That's nothing.

Framemaker? NeXt? Pampered upperclass brat.

Remember Wordstar (don't know which version) on plain MS DOS?

/Topper

;-

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> The new (4.0 IIRC) version of LibreOffice had problems on the Mac 

I'm at 4.1.

But I don't have a clue of its math support, since I wouldn't use it
for writing documents anyway.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: OT: polychromatic fonts

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Today I read about Microsoft planning to unleash polychromatic fonts
> on the world. What do you make of them? As far as I can see, they're
> an ungodly monstrosity:
> http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2013/08/polychromatic-digital-type

What does MS know of typography.

It took them something like 25 years (until Windows "Vista"?) to
understand that *screen* fonts must be designed specifically for
readability *on screen*.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Version 1.0.0 of the software was released in 1999. 
> by the way, in Tübingen, my home town



And it's hosted at one of my almae matres.

At least the FTP server.



>;->

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > > And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so.
> >
> > The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
> > than 10 years ago.
 
That was a typo and should have been 15, as the original message said.

I know Lyrix was implemented first using XForms some time late in the
90s, but it must have been after 1995.

And I didn't really consider it as usable around 1998, when I tried it
the first time. Neither Scientific Workplace, which I tried as well at
that time. I stuck with Framemaker back then.
 
> Way earlier than that. I switched to Lyx after I completed my
> dissertation (which I wrote in Framemaker, on a NeXt cube. Boy am I
> old!).



That's nothing.

Framemaker? NeXt? Pampered upperclass brat.

Remember Wordstar (don't know which version) on plain MS DOS?



>;->

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 BTW, not to tamper enthusiasms, but the standard output of
 LaTeX/TeX is not quite (yet) at the level that a professional
 typesetter would produce.

Obviously, an experienced competent human being will (almost) always be
able to deliver better results than *any* algorithm.

But since I am a non-typographer myself and since there is no money to
pay one nor the time for him to do his/her work, manual typesetting is
not an available option in my case (technical reports, sent out via
email and printed on office printers on A4 paper).

Personally I'm already infinitely grateful that I can now use
microtype with OTF fonts, since I don't like CM/LM *at all* and
microtype has essentially eliminated that fiddling with
overfull/underfull errors.

Besides, I tend to need italic small caps for my texts (lots of
acronyms), which no pure LaTeX typeface has anyway afaik. Well,
Libertine maybe? EB Garamond would have them, but that one doesn't have
a semibold yet.

 And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so. 

The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
than 10 years ago.

 Things like page-balancing, micro-adjustments, etc., are still very
 hard to do in Latex. 

E.g. typesetting multiple (2) columns to a fixed baseline-grid seems to
be impossible. Apparently this would be a must for magazines printed
on thin A4 paper.

 The out of the box standard output that you get before you start
 tampering with countless LaTeX commands is good, but not excellent.
 Publishers who can afford professional typesetters are better off
 asking their authors to deliver Word files, then import that into
 InDesign, and let the pros do their jobs. And typesetters do not use
 LaTex (by and large).

Probably because it's not the typesetters themselves who decide about
their own worktools...?

 On the other hand, there are now publishing houses (especially in the
 Humanities) that go to press directly from Word output...

I wouldn't read that if you paid me for it by the hour. Well, at a
rate of 100 EUR/h maybe.

Since I've started to use LyX/LaTeX, whenever I look at a PDF or printed
copy of the crap that Word produced from my hard labour (input), I
almost cry. Such a lot of work for nothing, (almost) no one ever read
those tens of thousand of pages that I wrote over all those years, just
because it *is* unreadable.

Word should be outlawed. Heck, it *is* outlawed within the European
Community (due to non-compliance with software ergonomics regulations),
but what manager cares.

A cute combination for some applications would be something like Scribus
for the page layout and LyX to edit the content of the text, then let
LaTeX do the line- and page-breaking of the individual columns. Scribus
knows frames with content rendered by outside programs and among
others it allows to embed LaTeX PDF output in these, but I haven't tried
it yet.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 BTW, not to tamper enthusiasms, but the standard output of
 LaTeX/TeX is not quite (yet) at the level that a professional
 typesetter would produce.

Obviously, an experienced competent human being will (almost) always be
able to deliver better results than *any* algorithm.

But since I am a non-typographer myself and since there is no money to
pay one nor the time for him to do his/her work, manual typesetting is
not an available option in my case (technical reports, sent out via
email and printed on office printers on A4 paper).

Personally I'm already infinitely grateful that I can now use
microtype with OTF fonts, since I don't like CM/LM *at all* and
microtype has essentially eliminated that fiddling with
overfull/underfull errors.

Besides, I tend to need italic small caps for my texts (lots of
acronyms), which no pure LaTeX typeface has anyway afaik. Well,
Libertine maybe? EB Garamond would have them, but that one doesn't have
a semibold yet.

 And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so. 

The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
than 10 years ago.

 Things like page-balancing, micro-adjustments, etc., are still very
 hard to do in Latex. 

E.g. typesetting multiple (2) columns to a fixed baseline-grid seems to
be impossible. Apparently this would be a must for magazines printed
on thin A4 paper.

 The out of the box standard output that you get before you start
 tampering with countless LaTeX commands is good, but not excellent.
 Publishers who can afford professional typesetters are better off
 asking their authors to deliver Word files, then import that into
 InDesign, and let the pros do their jobs. And typesetters do not use
 LaTex (by and large).

Probably because it's not the typesetters themselves who decide about
their own worktools...?

 On the other hand, there are now publishing houses (especially in the
 Humanities) that go to press directly from Word output...

I wouldn't read that if you paid me for it by the hour. Well, at a
rate of 100 EUR/h maybe.

Since I've started to use LyX/LaTeX, whenever I look at a PDF or printed
copy of the crap that Word produced from my hard labour (input), I
almost cry. Such a lot of work for nothing, (almost) no one ever read
those tens of thousand of pages that I wrote over all those years, just
because it *is* unreadable.

Word should be outlawed. Heck, it *is* outlawed within the European
Community (due to non-compliance with software ergonomics regulations),
but what manager cares.

A cute combination for some applications would be something like Scribus
for the page layout and LyX to edit the content of the text, then let
LaTeX do the line- and page-breaking of the individual columns. Scribus
knows frames with content rendered by outside programs and among
others it allows to embed LaTeX PDF output in these, but I haven't tried
it yet.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> BTW, not to tamper enthusiasms, but the "standard" output of
> LaTeX/TeX is not quite (yet) at the level that a professional
> typesetter would produce.

Obviously, an experienced competent human being will (almost) always be
able to deliver better results than *any* algorithm.

But since I am a non-typographer myself and since there is no money to
pay one nor the time for him to do his/her work, manual typesetting is
not an available option in my case (technical reports, sent out via
email and printed on office printers on A4 paper).

Personally I'm already infinitely grateful that I can now use
microtype with OTF fonts, since I don't like CM/LM *at all* and
microtype has essentially eliminated that fiddling with
overfull/underfull errors.

Besides, I tend to need italic small caps for my texts (lots of
acronyms), which no "pure" LaTeX typeface has anyway afaik. Well,
Libertine maybe? EB Garamond would have them, but that one doesn't have
a semibold yet.

> And I say this as a LyX-only writer for the past 15 years or so. 

The first public LyX version was when? Can't have been much longer
than 10 years ago.

> Things like page-balancing, micro-adjustments, etc., are still very
> hard to do in Latex. 

E.g. typesetting multiple (>2) columns to a fixed baseline-grid seems to
be impossible. Apparently this would be a "must" for magazines printed
on thin A4 paper.

> The "out of the box" "standard" output that you get before you start
> tampering with countless LaTeX commands is good, but not excellent.
> Publishers who can afford professional typesetters are better off
> asking their authors to deliver Word files, then import that into
> InDesign, and let the pros do their jobs. And typesetters do not use
> LaTex (by and large).

Probably because it's not the typesetters themselves who decide about
their own worktools...?

> On the other hand, there are now publishing houses (especially in the
> Humanities) that go to press directly from Word output...

I wouldn't read that if you paid me for it by the hour. Well, at a
rate of >>100 EUR/h maybe.

Since I've started to use LyX/LaTeX, whenever I look at a PDF or printed
copy of the crap that Word produced from my hard labour (input), I
almost cry. Such a lot of work for nothing, (almost) no one ever read
those tens of thousand of pages that I wrote over all those years, just
because it *is* unreadable.

Word should be outlawed. Heck, it *is* outlawed within the European
Community (due to non-compliance with software ergonomics regulations),
but what manager cares.

A cute combination for some applications would be something like Scribus
for the page layout and LyX to edit the content of the text, then let
LaTeX do the line- and page-breaking of the individual columns. Scribus
knows frames with content rendered by outside programs and among
others it allows to embed LaTeX PDF output in these, but I haven't tried
it yet.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

I forgot to mention one minus, btw:

Compared to XML, with LyX/LaTeX you can't *enforce* compliance of
documents with a given structure, like with XML schemas and validating
editors. That can be a nuisance in an environment with several authors.

 I literally cannot use Word or its clones for anything other than
 reading what someone else wrote.

I use LO mostly to convert MS-formats to PDF.

 I don't know how to make anything look right using Word.

No one *can* make anything look right using Word. This is strictly
impossible. And I know what I'm talking about, I've been using dozens
of document processing applications over ~25 years now. 

Applications like e.g. Wordperfect or Framemaker allow you to at least
use structure markup, with MS Word even that won't work.

And don't even dream of readable output.

Since all the typographic algorithms of TeX (linebreaking etc.) are
well-documented open-source, I always wondered why none of the more
reasonable document processors has ever implemented them. Wordperfect
could have been a killer application like that. Their structure markup
concept was so well done that they were even able to implement an XML
editor using the WP GUI.

 For classroom slides I use beamer -- makes it trivial to do.

For beamer I still prefer Texworks. The last time I tried, I couldn't
get the overlays to work *exactly* the way I wanted them with LyX, this
is one thing that's just much easier with a source-level editor.

I do use LyX to write the content first, then export to LaTeX and
add the overlays in TexWorks.

 But with LyX I can see what I am doing, with properly typeset
 equations, so I can think while I am writing.
 
That's what I call syntax hiding (as opposed to
syntax-highlighting).

\prayermill{

Just sometimes I wish I could optionally display the source *and edit*
it.

}

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

  The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is
  generation of documents from databases.

 That I do with LaTeX and Perl (such as pulling out VAT out of my
 accounting package SQL-Ledger and printing it onto the scanned
 form :-)-O

That's exactly why I prefer to use LO for such things: 

I don't want to code anything for such trivial tasks.

Especially not \choke{Perl}.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

I forgot to mention one minus, btw:

Compared to XML, with LyX/LaTeX you can't *enforce* compliance of
documents with a given structure, like with XML schemas and validating
editors. That can be a nuisance in an environment with several authors.

 I literally cannot use Word or its clones for anything other than
 reading what someone else wrote.

I use LO mostly to convert MS-formats to PDF.

 I don't know how to make anything look right using Word.

No one *can* make anything look right using Word. This is strictly
impossible. And I know what I'm talking about, I've been using dozens
of document processing applications over ~25 years now. 

Applications like e.g. Wordperfect or Framemaker allow you to at least
use structure markup, with MS Word even that won't work.

And don't even dream of readable output.

Since all the typographic algorithms of TeX (linebreaking etc.) are
well-documented open-source, I always wondered why none of the more
reasonable document processors has ever implemented them. Wordperfect
could have been a killer application like that. Their structure markup
concept was so well done that they were even able to implement an XML
editor using the WP GUI.

 For classroom slides I use beamer -- makes it trivial to do.

For beamer I still prefer Texworks. The last time I tried, I couldn't
get the overlays to work *exactly* the way I wanted them with LyX, this
is one thing that's just much easier with a source-level editor.

I do use LyX to write the content first, then export to LaTeX and
add the overlays in TexWorks.

 But with LyX I can see what I am doing, with properly typeset
 equations, so I can think while I am writing.
 
That's what I call syntax hiding (as opposed to
syntax-highlighting).

\prayermill{

Just sometimes I wish I could optionally display the source *and edit*
it.

}

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

  The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is
  generation of documents from databases.

 That I do with LaTeX and Perl (such as pulling out VAT out of my
 accounting package SQL-Ledger and printing it onto the scanned
 form :-)-O

That's exactly why I prefer to use LO for such things: 

I don't want to code anything for such trivial tasks.

Especially not \choke{Perl}.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

I forgot to mention one "minus", btw:

Compared to XML, with LyX/LaTeX you can't *enforce* compliance of
documents with a given structure, like with XML schemas and validating
editors. That can be a nuisance in an environment with several authors.

> I literally cannot use Word or its clones for anything other than
> reading what someone else wrote.

I use LO mostly to convert MS-formats to PDF.

> I don't know how to make anything look right using Word.

No one *can* "make anything look right using Word". This is strictly
impossible. And I know what I'm talking about, I've been using dozens
of "document processing" applications over ~25 years now. 

Applications like e.g. Wordperfect or Framemaker allow you to at least
use structure markup, with MS Word even that won't work.

And don't even dream of readable output.

Since all the typographic algorithms of TeX (linebreaking etc.) are
well-documented open-source, I always wondered why none of the more
reasonable document processors has ever implemented them. Wordperfect
could have been a "killer application" like that. Their structure markup
concept was so well done that they were even able to implement an XML
editor using the WP GUI.

> For classroom slides I use beamer -- makes it trivial to do.

For beamer I still prefer Texworks. The last time I tried, I couldn't
get the overlays to work *exactly* the way I wanted them with LyX, this
is one thing that's just much easier with a source-level editor.

I do use LyX to write the content first, then export to LaTeX and
add the overlays in TexWorks.

> But with LyX I can see what I am doing, with properly typeset
> equations, so I can think while I am writing.
 
That's what I call "syntax hiding" (as opposed to
"syntax-highlighting").

\prayermill{

Just sometimes I wish I could optionally display the source *and edit*
it.

}

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is
> > generation of documents from databases.
>
> That I do with LaTeX and Perl (such as pulling out VAT out of my
> accounting package SQL-Ledger and printing it onto the scanned
> form :-)-O

That's exactly why I prefer to use LO for such things: 

I don't want to code anything for such trivial tasks.

Especially not \choke{Perl}.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I'm always looking for software that fits me better, giving me the 
 output I'm looking for.
 
 I'm interested in knowing what users of LyX think of the idea of
 using it as a general word processor, instead of MS Word, Libre
 Office, Apple's Pages, etc.
 
 Pluses?  Minuses?

Since I've started using LyX, it has replaced all other document
processing applications for almost everything. And I've started using
LyX since LuaLaTeX resp. XeTeX support OTF fonts and Microtype.

Plus: Produces reading-friendly output. I had wondered for a *long*
time why no one would actually read my reports - until I figured out
that typography is not about esthetic taste, but reading ergonomics.

Minus: Since I have only some standard document types that I've set
up some time ago the way I need them and that I don't touch after I've
set them up, I forget how to adapt them when I need to change something.

The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is generation of
documents from databases.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I'm always looking for software that fits me better, giving me the 
 output I'm looking for.
 
 I'm interested in knowing what users of LyX think of the idea of
 using it as a general word processor, instead of MS Word, Libre
 Office, Apple's Pages, etc.
 
 Pluses?  Minuses?

Since I've started using LyX, it has replaced all other document
processing applications for almost everything. And I've started using
LyX since LuaLaTeX resp. XeTeX support OTF fonts and Microtype.

Plus: Produces reading-friendly output. I had wondered for a *long*
time why no one would actually read my reports - until I figured out
that typography is not about esthetic taste, but reading ergonomics.

Minus: Since I have only some standard document types that I've set
up some time ago the way I need them and that I don't touch after I've
set them up, I forget how to adapt them when I need to change something.

The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is generation of
documents from databases.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Question: Using LyX as your daily word processor

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I'm always looking for software that fits me better, giving me the 
> output I'm looking for.
> 
> I'm interested in knowing what users of LyX think of the idea of
> using it as a general word processor, instead of MS Word, Libre
> Office, Apple's Pages, etc.
> 
> Pluses?  Minuses?

Since I've started using LyX, it has replaced all other "document
processing" applications for almost everything. And I've started using
LyX since LuaLaTeX resp. XeTeX support OTF fonts and Microtype.

Plus: Produces reading-friendly output. I had wondered for a *long*
time why no one would actually read my reports - until I figured out
that "typography" is not about esthetic "taste", but reading ergonomics.

Minus: Since I have only some "standard" document types that I've set
up some time ago the way I need them and that I don't touch after I've
set them up, I forget how to adapt them when I need to change something.

The only case where I still prefer to use LO over LyX is generation of
documents from databases.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX needs a quicker way to apply character styles

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Now I'd like to ask another favor: a quicker way to apply character
 styles. As it stands now, 
 
 * Highlight
 * rightclick
 * Select Text Style to pop up the text style menu
 * Select your character style off that popup.

Applications with a well-dsigned GUI use a listbox that can be floated
or docked as a palette instead of a popup menu for such things. In
fact any menu, including popups, should be possible to be ripped off
as such a palette.

I had suggested this a long time ago already on this list for the
environment popup menu on the main toolbar. 

 You can also do it with the keyboard:
 
 * Highlight
 * Alt+E then S
 * Keep hitting Tab until it highlights the right character style.

The reasonable solution would be to allow the users to assign
custom shortcuts to each and every menu item, including items in
palettes.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX needs a quicker way to apply character styles

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Now I'd like to ask another favor: a quicker way to apply character
 styles. As it stands now, 
 
 * Highlight
 * rightclick
 * Select Text Style to pop up the text style menu
 * Select your character style off that popup.

Applications with a well-dsigned GUI use a listbox that can be floated
or docked as a palette instead of a popup menu for such things. In
fact any menu, including popups, should be possible to be ripped off
as such a palette.

I had suggested this a long time ago already on this list for the
environment popup menu on the main toolbar. 

 You can also do it with the keyboard:
 
 * Highlight
 * Alt+E then S
 * Keep hitting Tab until it highlights the right character style.

The reasonable solution would be to allow the users to assign
custom shortcuts to each and every menu item, including items in
palettes.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: LyX needs a quicker way to apply character styles

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Now I'd like to ask another favor: a quicker way to apply character
> styles. As it stands now, 
> 
> * Highlight
> * rightclick
> * Select Text Style to pop up the text style menu
> * Select your character style off that popup.

Applications with a well-dsigned GUI use a listbox that can be floated
or docked as a "palette" instead of a popup menu for such things. In
fact any menu, including popups, should be possible to be "ripped off"
as such a "palette".

I had suggested this a long time ago already on this list for the
environment popup menu on the main toolbar. 

> You can also do it with the keyboard:
> 
> * Highlight
> * Alt+E then S
> * Keep hitting Tab until it highlights the right character style.

The reasonable solution would be to allow the users to assign
custom shortcuts to each and every menu item, including items in
"palettes".

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Why no docbook export on LyX 2.03?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 No, I'm using a derivative of the LaTeX Book style. Shouldn't I be
 able to export to docbook anyway?

Of course not, since the document structure(s) won't match.

To be able to export to docbook, you need to use a LaTeX document class
that matches the docbook structure.

And even then, LyX afaik does not enforce a schema like XML/SGML
editors do, so you can still end up accidentally creating a document
that wouldn't validate/convert.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Why no docbook export on LyX 2.03?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 No, I'm using a derivative of the LaTeX Book style. Shouldn't I be
 able to export to docbook anyway?

Of course not, since the document structure(s) won't match.

To be able to export to docbook, you need to use a LaTeX document class
that matches the docbook structure.

And even then, LyX afaik does not enforce a schema like XML/SGML
editors do, so you can still end up accidentally creating a document
that wouldn't validate/convert.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Why no docbook export on LyX 2.03?

[Wolfgang Keller]

> No, I'm using a derivative of the LaTeX Book style. Shouldn't I be
> able to export to docbook anyway?

Of course not, since the document structure(s) won't match.

To be able to export to docbook, you need to use a LaTeX document class
that matches the docbook structure.

And even then, LyX afaik does not enforce a "schema" like XML/SGML
editors do, so you can still end up accidentally creating a document
that wouldn't validate/convert.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Installation und Verwendung des TikZ-Paket in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I think also inkscape can export to tikz via some plugin.

http://code.google.com/p/inkscape2tikz/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/eps2pgf/

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Installation und Verwendung des TikZ-Paket in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I think also inkscape can export to tikz via some plugin.

http://code.google.com/p/inkscape2tikz/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/eps2pgf/

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Installation und Verwendung des TikZ-Paket in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I think also inkscape can export to tikz via some plugin.

http://code.google.com/p/inkscape2tikz/

http://sourceforge.net/projects/eps2pgf/

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: beamer documentation

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Where could I find beamer documentation on how to customize or adjust
 a template according to my liking (in the document's preamble)? The
 user guide is quite long still superficial regarding this. For
 example I would like to change the sizes and positioning of the
 headline and footline, changing the navigation icons, etc.

There's a specific Beamer mailinglist:

http://groups.google.com/group/beamer-class/subscribe?hl=en_US

mailto:beamer-class+subscr...@googlegroups.com

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

  of course he's right, but then he can google what DILLIGAF stands
  for :-)-O

 No he can't, with comments like
 /open source programs have great appeal for people who want to
 tinker with computers but almost none for those who actually want to
 do something./
 
 He would not be able to use Google as it is running open source 
 programs, and he wouldn't use it as it's against his principles.

He couldn't use the internet reasonably altogether, since BIND is
FOSS.

And most DNS servers are also running on FOSS operating systems, btw.

And then there are FOSS database systems such as e.g. PostgreSQL
feeding those BINDs with the data they need.

Besides all those routers and switches running firmware based on various
FOSS operating systems.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: beamer documentation

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Where could I find beamer documentation on how to customize or adjust
 a template according to my liking (in the document's preamble)? The
 user guide is quite long still superficial regarding this. For
 example I would like to change the sizes and positioning of the
 headline and footline, changing the navigation icons, etc.

There's a specific Beamer mailinglist:

http://groups.google.com/group/beamer-class/subscribe?hl=en_US

mailto:beamer-class+subscr...@googlegroups.com

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

  of course he's right, but then he can google what DILLIGAF stands
  for :-)-O

 No he can't, with comments like
 /open source programs have great appeal for people who want to
 tinker with computers but almost none for those who actually want to
 do something./
 
 He would not be able to use Google as it is running open source 
 programs, and he wouldn't use it as it's against his principles.

He couldn't use the internet reasonably altogether, since BIND is
FOSS.

And most DNS servers are also running on FOSS operating systems, btw.

And then there are FOSS database systems such as e.g. PostgreSQL
feeding those BINDs with the data they need.

Besides all those routers and switches running firmware based on various
FOSS operating systems.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: beamer documentation

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Where could I find beamer documentation on how to customize or adjust
> a template according to my liking (in the document's preamble)? The
> user guide is quite long still superficial regarding this. For
> example I would like to change the sizes and positioning of the
> headline and footline, changing the navigation icons, etc.

There's a specific Beamer mailinglist:





Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > of course he's right, but then he can google what DILLIGAF stands
> > for :-)-O

> No he can't, with comments like
> /"open source programs have great appeal for people who want to
> tinker with computers but almost none for those who actually want to
> do something."/
> 
> He would not be able to use Google as it is running open source 
> programs, and he wouldn't use it as it's against his principles.

He couldn't use "the internet" reasonably altogether, since BIND is
FOSS.

And most DNS servers are also running on FOSS operating systems, btw.

And then there are FOSS database systems such as e.g. PostgreSQL
feeding those BINDs with the data they need.

Besides all those routers and switches running firmware based on various
FOSS operating systems.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 But I can tell you this guy is going to come back and say he's a great
 and mighty best selling author, ask how many books have I sold. While
 books provide a part of my income, I have no best sellers, either now
 or in the past.
 
 So, when he comes back and asks that, it would be *wonderful* to give
 the writer's list one or more best seller books (I think something
 with an Amazon rank of less than 5000 would do it), to refute his
 statement, by counterexample.

First, LyX is just a GUI, a sort-of-IDE for LaTeX, even though it uses
its own file format. And you would never make a distinction between the
various LaTeX IDEs or editors or front-ends or...

Next, LaTeX (and consequently, any of the various front-ends for it) is
*the* publishing tool within the scientific world. Obviously, no one
would write pulp fiction or non-fiction bestseller books with it,
since those authors aren't scientists.

And concerning .doc as a content exchange format; During my last 25
years of experience with writing documents I have *never*, repeat
*never* seen anyone re-use from a .doc document any content beyond bare
naked unformatted raw text. Even if it was for re-use *within* MS Word.

Paste as unformatted text is the only possibility of content re-use
that the spaghetti-format of Word effectively allows. No matter what
effort you deploy in preparing templates with styles and whatnot - it
won't work, ever.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

 But I can tell you this guy is going to come back and say he's a great
 and mighty best selling author, ask how many books have I sold. While
 books provide a part of my income, I have no best sellers, either now
 or in the past.
 
 So, when he comes back and asks that, it would be *wonderful* to give
 the writer's list one or more best seller books (I think something
 with an Amazon rank of less than 5000 would do it), to refute his
 statement, by counterexample.

First, LyX is just a GUI, a sort-of-IDE for LaTeX, even though it uses
its own file format. And you would never make a distinction between the
various LaTeX IDEs or editors or front-ends or...

Next, LaTeX (and consequently, any of the various front-ends for it) is
*the* publishing tool within the scientific world. Obviously, no one
would write pulp fiction or non-fiction bestseller books with it,
since those authors aren't scientists.

And concerning .doc as a content exchange format; During my last 25
years of experience with writing documents I have *never*, repeat
*never* seen anyone re-use from a .doc document any content beyond bare
naked unformatted raw text. Even if it was for re-use *within* MS Word.

Paste as unformatted text is the only possibility of content re-use
that the spaghetti-format of Word effectively allows. No matter what
effort you deploy in preparing templates with styles and whatnot - it
won't work, ever.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone know of a best-seller written in LyX

[Wolfgang Keller]

> But I can tell you this guy is going to come back and say he's a great
> and mighty best selling author, ask how many books have I sold. While
> books provide a part of my income, I have no best sellers, either now
> or in the past.
> 
> So, when he comes back and asks that, it would be *wonderful* to give
> the writer's list one or more best seller books (I think something
> with an Amazon rank of less than 5000 would do it), to refute his
> statement, by counterexample.

First, LyX is just a GUI, a sort-of-IDE for LaTeX, even though it uses
its own file format. And you would never make a distinction between the
various LaTeX IDEs or editors or front-ends or...

Next, LaTeX (and consequently, any of the various front-ends for it) is
*the* publishing tool within the scientific world. Obviously, no one
would write pulp fiction or non-fiction "bestseller" books with it,
since those authors aren't scientists.

And concerning .doc as a content exchange format; During my last 25
years of experience with writing documents I have *never*, repeat
*never* seen anyone re-use from a .doc document any content beyond bare
naked unformatted raw text. Even if it was for re-use *within* MS Word.

"Paste as unformatted text" is the only possibility of content re-use
that the spaghetti-format of Word effectively allows. No matter what
effort you deploy in preparing templates with styles and whatnot - it
won't work, ever.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone using LuaTeX with LyX?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Anyone here using LuaTeX with LyX? 

Me.

The reason is the combined support for opentype typefaces and microtype.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone using LuaTeX with LyX?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Anyone here using LuaTeX with LyX? 

Me.

The reason is the combined support for opentype typefaces and microtype.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Anyone using LuaTeX with LyX?

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Anyone here using LuaTeX with LyX? 

Me.

The reason is the combined support for opentype typefaces and microtype.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I have a feature request if this is not already requested to you:
 Ribbon Menus.

 What are your opinions about this? Is this approach correct to you?

Anti-ergonomic garbage.

Ribbon menus are a cerebral flatulance emanating from some product
manager's brain at MS.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

  Personally, I hate ribbon menus from the bottom of my heart.  I find
  them quite difficult to use, it takes ages to find what you are
  looking for.  Quite probably they are ok when you get used to them,
  but there is really no need for all to go the M$ way.
 
 This is also my judgement after having being forced to use these
 menus over the past months. But certainly, this is a matter of will
 and personal taste.

It isn't. Even if an empirical one, ergonomics is still a science with
very well established rules. 

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I have a feature request if this is not already requested to you:
 Ribbon Menus.

 What are your opinions about this? Is this approach correct to you?

Anti-ergonomic garbage.

Ribbon menus are a cerebral flatulance emanating from some product
manager's brain at MS.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

  Personally, I hate ribbon menus from the bottom of my heart.  I find
  them quite difficult to use, it takes ages to find what you are
  looking for.  Quite probably they are ok when you get used to them,
  but there is really no need for all to go the M$ way.
 
 This is also my judgement after having being forced to use these
 menus over the past months. But certainly, this is a matter of will
 and personal taste.

It isn't. Even if an empirical one, ergonomics is still a science with
very well established rules. 

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I have a feature request if this is not already requested to you:
> Ribbon Menus.

> What are your opinions about this? Is this approach correct to you?

Anti-ergonomic garbage.

"Ribbon menus" are a cerebral flatulance emanating from some product
manager's "brain" at MS.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: feature request: ribbon menus

[Wolfgang Keller]

> > Personally, I hate ribbon menus from the bottom of my heart.  I find
> > them quite difficult to use, it takes ages to find what you are
> > looking for.  Quite probably they are ok when you get used to them,
> > but there is really no need for all to go the M$ way.
> 
> This is also my judgement after having being forced to use these
> menus over the past months. But certainly, this is a matter of will
> and personal taste.

It isn't. Even if an empirical one, ergonomics is still a science with
very well established rules. 

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I occasionally teach a How to use MS Word 

That would be a rather short lesson:

*Not*.

SCNR.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I occasionally teach a How to use MS Word 

That would be a rather short lesson:

*Not*.

SCNR.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I occasionally teach a "How to use MS Word" 

That would be a rather short lesson:

*Not*.

SCNR.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 The selling point to adopting LyX, at least for some tasks, was the
 table editing.

*cough*

This is one of the issues where LyX still needs quite a bit of work
imho.

As it is now, it's pretty unusable, unless you hard-code column (or
table) widths in your document.

LyX doesn't even show a horizontal scrollbar when the table is wider
than the display. Which can result in the cursor being outside the
display.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

 The selling point to adopting LyX, at least for some tasks, was the
 table editing.

*cough*

This is one of the issues where LyX still needs quite a bit of work
imho.

As it is now, it's pretty unusable, unless you hard-code column (or
table) widths in your document.

LyX doesn't even show a horizontal scrollbar when the table is wider
than the display. Which can result in the cursor being outside the
display.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: [off-topic] LyX as a LaTeX table editor (and other selling advice)

[Wolfgang Keller]

> The selling point to adopting LyX, at least for some tasks, was the
> table editing.

*cough*

This is one of the issues where LyX still needs quite a bit of work
imho.

As it is now, it's pretty unusable, unless you hard-code column (or
table) widths in your document.

LyX doesn't even show a horizontal scrollbar when the table is wider
than the display. Which can result in the cursor being outside the
display.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Two Column Article - Text rows vertically misaligned

[Wolfgang Keller]

 just tried to typeset an article with two-column layout and am now
 faced with the problem that the text rows on the right hand are not
 vertically aligned to the one on the left hand (probably because of
 section titles?).
 
 Is there any option to force Lyx / Latex to ensure that the text rows
 are correctly aligned on both sides with respect to each other? 

As usual, CTAN is your friend. A search for grid typesetting finds:

http://ctan.org/pkg/grid

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Two Column Article - Text rows vertically misaligned

[Wolfgang Keller]

 just tried to typeset an article with two-column layout and am now
 faced with the problem that the text rows on the right hand are not
 vertically aligned to the one on the left hand (probably because of
 section titles?).
 
 Is there any option to force Lyx / Latex to ensure that the text rows
 are correctly aligned on both sides with respect to each other? 

As usual, CTAN is your friend. A search for grid typesetting finds:

http://ctan.org/pkg/grid

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Two Column Article - Text rows vertically misaligned

[Wolfgang Keller]

> just tried to typeset an article with two-column layout and am now
> faced with the problem that the text rows on the right hand are not
> vertically aligned to the one on the left hand (probably because of
> section titles?).
> 
> Is there any option to force Lyx / Latex to ensure that the text rows
> are correctly aligned on both sides with respect to each other? 

As usual, CTAN is your friend. A search for "grid typesetting" finds:

http://ctan.org/pkg/grid

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: Is there a way to change the header font to san serif?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Sorry for the repeated posting, but I haven't been able to find a
 solution to my problem.
 
 I'd like to know how I can change the header font from italicised
 serif to non-italicised san-serif.
 
 If anyone knows where I can place the \sffamily, or \textsf commands
 for the desired result, I will be most chuffed.
 
 I am using the report (KOMA-SCRIPT) document class.

The class/package documentation files on CTAN are usually your friend.
;-

Your local CTAN mirror will hold a copy of the Koma-Script
documentation scrguien.pdf.

There, in section 5.1.3 Formatting of Header and Footer, you will
find the following explanation:

[blockquote]

The command \headfont contains the commands which determine the font of
header and footer lines. Command \footfont contains the difference of
the footer to that. The difference for the style of the page number is
defined by the command \pnumfont.

Example:

If, for example, one wants the header to be typeset in bold sans serif,
the footer in non-bold sans serif, and the page number in a slanted
serif style, then one can use the following definitions:

\renewcommand {\headfont}{\normalfont \sffamily\bfseries}
\renewcommand* {\footfont} {\normalfont\sffamily}
\renewcommand {\pnumfont}{\normalfont \rmfamily \slshape}

From version 2.8p of the KOMA-Script classes a new unified user
interface scheme is implemented for font attributes. If scrpage2 is
used together with one of these classes, then it is recommended to set
up font attributes in the manner described in section 3.6 from page 50
onward.

Example:

Instead of \renewcommand the command \setkomafont should be used to
configure the font attributes. The previous definitions can then be
written as:

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\bfseries}
\setkomafont {pagefoot}{\normalfont\sffamily} 
\setkomafont{pagenumber}{\normalfont\rmfamily\slshape}

[end of blockquote]

So, to use an upright sans-serif for the header you would use this (I
haven't tried it):

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\upshape}

In LyX, this command would have to be included in the preamble, in
Documents-Settings-Preamble. Preferably at the last line.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang Keller

Re: Is there a way to change the header font to san serif?

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Sorry for the repeated posting, but I haven't been able to find a
 solution to my problem.
 
 I'd like to know how I can change the header font from italicised
 serif to non-italicised san-serif.
 
 If anyone knows where I can place the \sffamily, or \textsf commands
 for the desired result, I will be most chuffed.
 
 I am using the report (KOMA-SCRIPT) document class.

The class/package documentation files on CTAN are usually your friend.
;-

Your local CTAN mirror will hold a copy of the Koma-Script
documentation scrguien.pdf.

There, in section 5.1.3 Formatting of Header and Footer, you will
find the following explanation:

[blockquote]

The command \headfont contains the commands which determine the font of
header and footer lines. Command \footfont contains the difference of
the footer to that. The difference for the style of the page number is
defined by the command \pnumfont.

Example:

If, for example, one wants the header to be typeset in bold sans serif,
the footer in non-bold sans serif, and the page number in a slanted
serif style, then one can use the following definitions:

\renewcommand {\headfont}{\normalfont \sffamily\bfseries}
\renewcommand* {\footfont} {\normalfont\sffamily}
\renewcommand {\pnumfont}{\normalfont \rmfamily \slshape}

From version 2.8p of the KOMA-Script classes a new unified user
interface scheme is implemented for font attributes. If scrpage2 is
used together with one of these classes, then it is recommended to set
up font attributes in the manner described in section 3.6 from page 50
onward.

Example:

Instead of \renewcommand the command \setkomafont should be used to
configure the font attributes. The previous definitions can then be
written as:

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\bfseries}
\setkomafont {pagefoot}{\normalfont\sffamily} 
\setkomafont{pagenumber}{\normalfont\rmfamily\slshape}

[end of blockquote]

So, to use an upright sans-serif for the header you would use this (I
haven't tried it):

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\upshape}

In LyX, this command would have to be included in the preamble, in
Documents-Settings-Preamble. Preferably at the last line.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang Keller

Re: Is there a way to change the header font to san serif?

[Wolfgang Keller]

> Sorry for the repeated posting, but I haven't been able to find a
> solution to my problem.
> 
> I'd like to know how I can change the header font from italicised
> serif to non-italicised san-serif.
> 
> If anyone knows where I can place the \sffamily, or \textsf commands
> for the desired result, I will be most chuffed.
> 
> I am using the report (KOMA-SCRIPT) document class.

The class/package documentation files on CTAN are usually your friend.
>;->

Your local CTAN mirror will hold a copy of the Koma-Script
documentation scrguien.pdf.

There, in section 5.1.3 "Formatting of Header and Footer", you will
find the following explanation:

[blockquote]

The command \headfont contains the commands which determine the font of
header and footer lines. Command \footfont contains the difference of
the footer to that. The difference for the style of the page number is
defined by the command \pnumfont.

Example:

If, for example, one wants the header to be typeset in bold sans serif,
the footer in non-bold sans serif, and the page number in a slanted
serif style, then one can use the following definitions:

\renewcommand {\headfont}{\normalfont \sffamily\bfseries}
\renewcommand* {\footfont} {\normalfont\sffamily}
\renewcommand {\pnumfont}{\normalfont \rmfamily \slshape}

>From version 2.8p of the KOMA-Script classes a new unified user
interface scheme is implemented for font attributes. If scrpage2 is
used together with one of these classes, then it is recommended to set
up font attributes in the manner described in section 3.6 from page 50
onward.

Example:

Instead of \renewcommand the command \setkomafont should be used to
configure the font attributes. The previous definitions can then be
written as:

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\bfseries}
\setkomafont {pagefoot}{\normalfont\sffamily} 
\setkomafont{pagenumber}{\normalfont\rmfamily\slshape}

[end of blockquote]

So, to use an upright sans-serif for the header you would use this (I
haven't tried it):

\setkomafont{pagehead}{\normalfont\sffamily\upshape}

In LyX, this command would have to be included in the preamble, in
Documents->Settings->Preamble. Preferably at the last line.

Sincerely,

Wolfgang Keller

Re: 'Show changes in output' doesn't work

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I would like lyx to track my changes without showing
 them to me (and clatter the editor).
 
 What am I missing?

Use of Subversion?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: 'Show changes in output' doesn't work

[Wolfgang Keller]

 I would like lyx to track my changes without showing
 them to me (and clatter the editor).
 
 What am I missing?

Use of Subversion?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: 'Show changes in output' doesn't work

[Wolfgang Keller]

> I would like lyx to track my changes without showing
> them to me (and clatter the editor).
> 
> What am I missing?

Use of Subversion?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang

Re: SumatraPDF als viewer bei Lyx einstellen

[Wolfgang Keller]

Hint: This list is international, so english language is preferred.

At least if you would like to get an answer. ;-

 - dann unter Dateiformate pdflatex ausgewählt und als
 Anzeigeporgramm SumatraPDF eingetragen. 

Hier habe ich den vollen Pfad zu SumatraPDF eingegeben. Bei mir
funktioniert's so.
 
 Wenn ich das Dokument betrachen möchte kommen unten die Meldungen:
 - pdflatex started/done
 - biblatex started/done
 - Erfolgreiche Vorschau des Formates pdflatex
  
 Aber SumatraPDF startet nicht!!
  
 Woran kann's liegen?

Blick in Ansicht-Meldungen anzeigen?

MfG,

Wolfgang

Re: SumatraPDF als viewer bei Lyx einstellen

[Wolfgang Keller]

Hint: This list is international, so english language is preferred.

At least if you would like to get an answer. ;-

 - dann unter Dateiformate pdflatex ausgewählt und als
 Anzeigeporgramm SumatraPDF eingetragen. 

Hier habe ich den vollen Pfad zu SumatraPDF eingegeben. Bei mir
funktioniert's so.
 
 Wenn ich das Dokument betrachen möchte kommen unten die Meldungen:
 - pdflatex started/done
 - biblatex started/done
 - Erfolgreiche Vorschau des Formates pdflatex
  
 Aber SumatraPDF startet nicht!!
  
 Woran kann's liegen?

Blick in Ansicht-Meldungen anzeigen?

MfG,

Wolfgang

Re: SumatraPDF als viewer bei Lyx einstellen

[Wolfgang Keller]

Hint: This list is international, so english language is preferred.

At least if you would like to get an answer. >;->

> - dann unter "Dateiformate" "pdflatex" ausgewählt und als
> Anzeigeporgramm "SumatraPDF" eingetragen. 

Hier habe ich den vollen Pfad zu SumatraPDF eingegeben. Bei mir
funktioniert's so.
 
> Wenn ich das Dokument betrachen möchte kommen unten die Meldungen:
> - pdflatex started/done
> - biblatex started/done
> - Erfolgreiche Vorschau des Formates pdflatex
>  
> Aber SumatraPDF startet nicht!!
>  
> Woran kann's liegen?

Blick in Ansicht->Meldungen anzeigen?

MfG,

Wolfgang

Re: Graphics Tools

[Wolfgang Keller]

 Perhaps the best for now is dia.

Have you tried yEd?

Sincerely,

Wolfgang