On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Helge Hafting wrote:
If it seems like nothing happened UI-wise, then have the status area
proudly display something like document.pdf successfully exported!.
+1
This kind of feedback is ideal, because the user is _not_ forced to
dismiss some stupid dialog box. So the
On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Helge Hafting wrote:
If it seems like "nothing happened" UI-wise, then have the status area
proudly display something like "document.pdf successfully exported!".
+1
This kind of feedback is ideal, because the user is _not_ forced to
dismiss some stupid dialog box. So the
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Enrico Forestieri for...@lyx.org writes:
I think that the simplest and best way to handle this is allowing to
change name (and location) of the exported file through a file dialog.
Not everybody knows that, when exporting, the file will be located next
to the lyx
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Enrico Forestieri writes:
I think that the simplest and best way to handle this is allowing to
change name (and location) of the exported file through a file dialog.
Not everybody knows that, when exporting, the file will be located next
to the lyx
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 05:47:47PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Helge Hafting helge.haft...@hist.no writes:
It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the
filename of exported files. This way, exports with and without the
branch won't collide.
My common case:
I
Enrico Forestieri for...@lyx.org writes:
I think that the simplest and best way to handle this is allowing to
change name (and location) of the exported file through a file dialog.
Not everybody knows that, when exporting, the file will be located next
to the lyx file and, UI wise, it is bad
On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 05:47:47PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Helge Hafting writes:
>
> > It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the
> > filename of exported files. This way, exports with and without the
> > branch won't collide.
> >
> > My
Enrico Forestieri writes:
> I think that the simplest and best way to handle this is allowing to
> change name (and location) of the exported file through a file dialog.
> Not everybody knows that, when exporting, the file will be located next
> to the lyx file and, UI wise, it is
It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the filename
of exported files. This way, exports with and without the branch won't
collide.
My common case:
I make a test for my students, with answers in a answers branch.
When I export this to pdf, I get test.pdf. After activating
Helge Hafting helge.haft...@hist.no writes:
It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the
filename of exported files. This way, exports with and without the
branch won't collide.
My common case:
I make a test for my students, with answers in a answers branch.
When I export
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
correct, not over-engineered implementation.
+1.
The simplest would be a add name when exporting checkbox. That could
maybe be done by a change to Buffer::latexName.
Which name (if several
Jürgen Spitzmüller sp...@lyx.org writes:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
correct, not over-engineered implementation.
+1.
The simplest would be a add name when exporting checkbox. That could
maybe be done by a change to
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Append all the names of the active branches which have add name when
exporting selected.
Yes, that would work in most cases.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
correct, not over-engineered implementation.
+1.
The simplest would be a add name when exporting checkbox. That could
maybe be done by a change to Buffer::latexName.
Helge Hafting wrote:
Which name (if several active branches are involved)?
The names of all active branches that has this box checked. I meant to
have one checkbox per branch.
Yes, this strikes me sensible. I first thought Jean-Marc was thinking of one
general check-box only.
Jürgen
I'll just mention that what I do is create a new master document that
has the correct branches enabled. In addition to giving the new
version of the document a new name, this is particularly useful when
there are many branches. For example the paper version may have e.g.
branches for Topic A and C
It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the filename
of exported files. This way, exports with and without the branch won't
collide.
My common case:
I make a test for my students, with answers in a "answers" branch.
When I export this to pdf, I get "test.pdf". After
Helge Hafting writes:
> It is useful to give active branches opportunity to add to the
> filename of exported files. This way, exports with and without the
> branch won't collide.
>
> My common case:
> I make a test for my students, with answers in a "answers" branch.
>
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
> correct, not over-engineered implementation.
+1.
> The simplest would be a "add name when exporting" checkbox. That could
> maybe be done by a change to Buffer::latexName.
Which name (if
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
>> I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
>> correct, not over-engineered implementation.
>
> +1.
>
>> The simplest would be a "add name when exporting" checkbox. That could
>> maybe be done
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Append all the names of the active branches which have "add name when
> exporting" selected.
Yes, that would work in most cases.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I have to say that I use that too. What we have to do is to find the
correct, not over-engineered implementation.
+1.
The simplest would be a "add name when exporting" checkbox. That could
maybe be done by a change to Buffer::latexName.
Helge Hafting wrote:
>> Which name (if several active branches are involved)?
>
> The names of all active branches that has this box checked. I meant to
> have one checkbox per branch.
Yes, this strikes me sensible. I first thought Jean-Marc was thinking of one
general check-box only.
Jürgen
I'll just mention that what I do is create a new master document that
has the correct branches enabled. In addition to giving the new
version of the document a new name, this is particularly useful when
there are many branches. For example the paper version may have e.g.
branches for Topic A and C
24 matches
Mail list logo