From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-02 05:54:48
|
Hi, in "User Tags" -> "Edit User Tags", the strings "Key replacement: % before word" and "Key replacement: % after word" are not translated. BTW, those default user tags remain a bit mysterious for me and, IMO: 1. they aren't user tags since they are default tags; 2. they should be better documented. What about an extra field (in addition to "Name", "Abbreviation", "Trigger", "Type", "LaTeX Content" ones) where comments about the tags could be entered either by TXS team for those default tags or by the user for its own tags? Best regards. -- Denis |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-02 05:56:31
|
Le lundi 02/07/12 à 07h54, Denis Bitouzé <dbi...@wa...> a écrit : > in "User Tags" -> "Edit User Tags", BTW, why not "Tags" instead of "User Tags"? -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-02 10:36:50
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 07:56 > > Le lundi 02/07/12 à 07h54, > Denis Bitouzé <dbi...@wa...> a écrit : > > > in "User Tags" -> "Edit User Tags", > > BTW, why not "Tags" instead of "User Tags"? No special reason (historical). BTW the German translation uses Macro instead of Tag. Is that better? |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-02 11:01:36
|
Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h36, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > BTW the German translation uses Macro instead of Tag. It is also the word I chose in French. > Is that better? IMO, yes. -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-02 11:58:34
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 13:01 > > Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h36, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > BTW the German translation uses Macro instead of Tag. > > It is also the word I chose in French. > > > Is that better? > > IMO, yes. Ok, then I will rename "User Tags" -> "Macros" Any objections? |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-04 06:58:56
|
Le lundi 02/07/12 à 13h58, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > Ok, then I will rename "User Tags" -> "Macros" I've seen the change you made, thanks. In TXS strings to be translated, the word "command" stands sometimes for "compilation command" and sometimes for "LaTeX command". When translating to French, I try to distinguish these two meanings by using different words: "compilation" for "compilation command" and "macro" for "LaTeX command". Unfortunately, Qt Linguist 4.7.4 on my Linux box doesn't show "Sources and Forms" at the top right ("Source code not available") and, sometimes, the context cannot be deduced from the string. What do you think about disambiguate these two meanings by using different words for these two meanings in source texts? -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-04 08:45:02
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 08:59 > > Le lundi 02/07/12 à 13h58, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > Ok, then I will rename "User Tags" -> "Macros" > > I've seen the change you made, thanks. > > In TXS strings to be translated, the word "command" stands sometimes for > "compilation command" and sometimes for "LaTeX command". When > translating to French, I try to distinguish these two meanings by using different > words: "compilation" for "compilation command" and "macro" > for "LaTeX command". Unfortunately, Qt Linguist 4.7.4 on my Linux box doesn't > show "Sources and Forms" at the top right ("Source code not > available") and, sometimes, the context cannot be deduced from the string. > > What do you think about disambiguate these two meanings by using different > words for these two meanings in source texts? A clear disambiguation would be desirable. We just introduced the term "macros" for the former user tags, which include triggers and scripting capabilities. A simple \section should not be termed the same. And I feel, that macro for that Is slightly uncommon. I don't know any simple naming scheme. We have the following groups of "commands" that need disambiguation: - latex commands/tags/macros - macros (former user tags) - Tools/Commands of external programs like pdflatex, biblatex - internal TeXstudio tools/commands, like quick, view > -- > Denis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-04 10:09:38
|
Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 10h44, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > A clear disambiguation would be desirable. Yes. > We just introduced the term "macros" for the former user tags, which > include triggers and scripting capabilities. OK. > A simple \section should not be termed the same. And I feel, that > macro for that Is slightly uncommon. No. For instance: http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?keyword=macro > I don't know any simple naming scheme. We have the following groups > of "commands" that need disambiguation: > - latex commands/tags/macros These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. IMHO, they all have the same meaning. > - macros (former user tags) User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in LaTeX kernel or in packages. > - Tools/Commands of external programs like pdflatex, biblatex Yes. BTW, "Tools" menu should maybe contain only "Build" and "Compilation" commands (LaTeX tools) and maybe be renamed "Build", and other tools, from "Analyze text" to "Find word repetitions" (text tools) should be moved in another menu, maybe in "Idefix" menu. > - internal TeXstudio tools/commands, like quick, view I would keep them with "LaTeX tools" as they are directly connected to the "building" of the documents. -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-04 10:49:34
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 12:09 > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 10h44, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > A clear disambiguation would be desirable. > > Yes. > > > We just introduced the term "macros" for the former user tags, which > > include triggers and scripting capabilities. > > OK. > > > A simple \section should not be termed the same. And I feel, that > > macro for that Is slightly uncommon. > > No. For instance: > > http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?keyword=macro Ok. > > I don't know any simple naming scheme. We have the following groups of > > "commands" that need disambiguation: > > - latex commands/tags/macros > > These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. IMHO, they all > have the same meaning. They do. Definition: Every token in a tex file that starts with a backslash. > > - macros (former user tags) > > User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in LaTeX kernel or in > packages. Not exactly. Wikipedia: "A macro [...] is a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain input sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped to a replacement input sequence." For latex macros, the replacement happens in the latex compiler. For user macros, the replacement happens in the editor. Furthermore these are more general and not restricted to replacing strings. The input may also be an event like loading a document, the output may be a script, that is run. Technically they are both macros. But because of the above differences we should use different terms. > > - Tools/Commands of external programs like pdflatex, biblatex > > Yes. BTW, "Tools" menu should maybe contain only "Build" and "Compilation" > commands (LaTeX tools) and maybe be renamed "Build", and other tools, from > "Analyze text" to "Find word repetitions" (text tools) should be moved in > another menu, maybe in "Idefix" menu. I'm ok with that. > > - internal TeXstudio tools/commands, like quick, view > > I would keep them with "LaTeX tools" as they are directly connected to the > "building" of the documents. > -- > Denis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-04 11:52:34
|
Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 12h49, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > - latex commands/tags/macros > > > > These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. IMHO, > > they all have the same meaning. > > They do. Definition: Every token in a tex file that starts with a > backslash. > > > > - macros (former user tags) > > > > User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in LaTeX > > kernel or in packages. > > Not exactly. Wikipedia: > "A macro [...] is a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain input > sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped to a > replacement input sequence." > For latex macros, the replacement happens in the latex compiler. > For user macros, the replacement happens in the editor. But they also exist "latex user macros". For instance, if a user defines in its .tex file: \newcommand\foo{bar} it could be interested in extending predefined TXS latex macros with \foo macro, hence related to one of the shortcuts Shift+F... and maybe to a trigger. > Furthermore these are more general and not restricted to replacing > strings. The input may also be an event like loading a document, the > output may be a script, that is run. IMO, the overwhelming majority of the TXS users will use the "Macros" TXS feature only in the way I described above, a vast majority will in addition use macros with argument(s) and environments, and only a minority will use it the way you describe here. > Technically they are both macros. But because of the above > differences we should use different terms. So I suggest to not loose the majority of the TXS users, especially the beginners, with maybe truer but intimidating, incomprehensible and too general terms. -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-04 12:24:45
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 13:52 > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 12h49, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > > > - latex commands/tags/macros > > > > > > These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. IMHO, > > > they all have the same meaning. > > > > They do. Definition: Every token in a tex file that starts with a > > backslash. > > > > > > - macros (former user tags) > > > > > > User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in LaTeX > > > kernel or in packages. > > > > Not exactly. Wikipedia: > > "A macro [...] is a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain input > > sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped to a > > replacement input sequence." > > For latex macros, the replacement happens in the latex compiler. > > For user macros, the replacement happens in the editor. > > But they also exist "latex user macros". For instance, if a user defines in its .tex > file: > > \newcommand\foo{bar} Yes, but we don't distinguish that. For the editor it's a latex macro. We don't care, if it's native latex or user created. > it could be interested in extending predefined TXS latex macros with \foo > macro, hence related to one of the shortcuts Shift+F... and maybe to a trigger. I don't understand what you mean here. > > Furthermore these are more general and not restricted to replacing > > strings. The input may also be an event like loading a document, the > > output may be a script, that is run. > > IMO, the overwhelming majority of the TXS users will use the "Macros" > TXS feature only in the way I described above, a vast majority will in addition > use macros with argument(s) and environments, and only a minority will use it > the way you describe here. > > > Technically they are both macros. But because of the above differences > > we should use different terms. > > So I suggest to not loose the majority of the TXS users, especially the beginners, > with maybe truer but intimidating, incomprehensible and too general terms. Ok I suggest the following: - Using "Macro" for the application macros (former "User tags") is fine. They perform some action in the editor. Thats likely what a user without TeX background would expect. - Use "Command" for latex tokens. A TeX expert as well as a beginner will understand this. Whereas understanding "(LaTeX) Macro" requires some background knowledge on the way LaTeX works. We don't have to care, how latex handles these things in the background. For the simple user and the editor \something is just a command that tells the tex engine to do something. If it's not clear from the context, it can be extended to "LaTeX Command". - Try to avoid using "Command" in other contexts, if possible: - Rename Tools menu to Build, Move the non-build related entries to Idefix - Rename Tools -> Commands to either Build -> Tools or Build -> Programs - Rename Config page "Commands" to either "Tools" or "External Programs" > -- > Denis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-04 12:51:03
|
Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 14h24, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 13:52 > > > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 12h49, > > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > > > > > - latex commands/tags/macros > > > > > > > > These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. > > > > IMHO, they all have the same meaning. > > > > > > They do. Definition: Every token in a tex file that starts with a > > > backslash. > > > > > > > > - macros (former user tags) > > > > > > > > User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in > > > > LaTeX kernel or in packages. > > > > > > Not exactly. Wikipedia: > > > "A macro [...] is a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain > > > input sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped > > > to a replacement input sequence." > > > For latex macros, the replacement happens in the latex compiler. > > > For user macros, the replacement happens in the editor. > > > > But they also exist "latex user macros". For instance, if a user > > defines > in its .tex > > file: > > > > \newcommand\foo{bar} > > Yes, but we don't distinguish that. For the editor it's a latex > macro. We don't care, if it's native latex or user created. You're right, my example was wrong (see below). > > it could be interested in extending predefined TXS latex macros > > with \foo macro, hence related to one of the shortcuts Shift+F... > > and maybe to a > trigger. > > I don't understand what you mean here. It doesn't matter if a macro is a native latex, a package latex or user created one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not mixed with more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so on. > [...] > > Ok I suggest the following: > - Using "Macro" for the application macros (former "User tags") is > fine. They perform some action in the editor. That’s likely what a > user without TeX background would expect. Well, sorry, I'm not sure what sort of "application macros" do you have in mind here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor Macro" to distinguish from "LaTeX Macro". > - Use "Command" for latex tokens. I would in the contrary suggest "Macro", see below. > A TeX expert as well as a beginner will understand this. Whereas > understanding "(LaTeX) Macro" requires some background knowledge on > the way LaTeX works. I would say instead that "(LaTeX) Macros" are well known by all LaTeX users. What requires some background knowledge on the way LaTeX works are "Personal (LaTeX) Macros" because the beginner may not know he may create its own LaTeX macros. > We don't have to care, how latex handles these things in the > background. For the simple user and the editor \something is just a > command that tells the tex engine to do something. If it's not clear > from the context, it can be extended to "LaTeX Command". It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens or for personal (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be related to the editor would be called "Editor Macro" > - Try to avoid using "Command" in other contexts, if possible: > - Rename Tools menu to Build, Move the non-build related entries to > Idefix Yes. > - Rename Tools -> Commands to either Build -> Tools or Build -> > Programs The latter is better ("Tools" is too little precise). > - Rename Config page "Commands" to either "Tools" or "External > Programs" To be consistent, the previous "Build -> Programs" should then be replaced by "Build -> External Programs". The "External" adjective is nice IMO but may be confusing for beginners (but could help them to learn that TXS and LaTeX are not the same! ;) -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-04 15:40:32
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 14:51 > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 14h24, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > > Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2012 13:52 > > > > > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 12h49, > > > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > - latex commands/tags/macros > > > > > > > > > > These should be precisely defined before to be disambiguated. > > > > > IMHO, they all have the same meaning. > > > > > > > > They do. Definition: Every token in a tex file that starts with a > > > > backslash. > > > > > > > > > > - macros (former user tags) > > > > > > > > > > User tags (or user macros) are macros, as macros defined in > > > > > LaTeX kernel or in packages. > > > > > > > > Not exactly. Wikipedia: > > > > "A macro [...] is a rule or pattern that specifies how a certain > > > > input sequence (often a sequence of characters) should be mapped > > > > to a replacement input sequence." > > > > For latex macros, the replacement happens in the latex compiler. > > > > For user macros, the replacement happens in the editor. > > > > > > But they also exist "latex user macros". For instance, if a user > > > defines > > in its .tex > > > file: > > > > > > \newcommand\foo{bar} > > > > Yes, but we don't distinguish that. For the editor it's a latex macro. > > We don't care, if it's native latex or user created. > > You're right, my example was wrong (see below). > > > > it could be interested in extending predefined TXS latex macros with > > > \foo macro, hence related to one of the shortcuts Shift+F... > > > and maybe to a > > trigger. > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. > > It doesn't matter if a macro is a native latex, a package latex or user created I agree, that \native, \fromPackage and \fromNewCommand are equal in our context. > one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not mixed with > more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so on. What sould be added? I don't see what you would need for the three above cases. They are not mixed with the editor marcos. Do you want the editor macros to be separated in simple Text insertion/replacement and more complex functions? > > [...] > > > > Ok I suggest the following: > > - Using "Macro" for the application macros (former "User tags") is > > fine. They perform some action in the editor. That’s likely what a > > user without TeX background would expect. > > Well, sorry, I'm not sure what sort of "application macros" do you have in mind > here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor Macro" to distinguish from > "LaTeX Macro". "Application macro" is from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_%28computer_science%29, although we do not have a recorder, but only scripting capabilities. "Editor macro" would be equally good. > > - Use "Command" for latex tokens. > > I would in the contrary suggest "Macro", see below. > > > A TeX expert as well as a beginner will understand this. Whereas > > understanding "(LaTeX) Macro" requires some background knowledge on > > the way LaTeX works. > > I would say instead that "(LaTeX) Macros" are well known by all LaTeX users. > What requires some background knowledge on the way LaTeX works are > "Personal (LaTeX) Macros" because the beginner may not know he may create > its own LaTeX macros. > > > We don't have to care, how latex handles these things in the > > background. For the simple user and the editor \something is just a > > command that tells the tex engine to do something. If it's not clear > > from the context, it can be extended to "LaTeX Command". > > It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens or for personal > (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be related to the editor would be > called "Editor Macro" I think distinguishing between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is a bit subtle. "LaTeX Macro" and "Editor Macro" would be better, but its more verbose. And still, while technically both are macros, in the context of use they are quite different. Therefore I proposed "Command" and "Macro", because they are two completely different words. > > - Try to avoid using "Command" in other contexts, if possible: > > - Rename Tools menu to Build, Move the non-build related entries to > > Idefix > > Yes. > > > - Rename Tools -> Commands to either Build -> Tools or Build -> > > Programs > > The latter is better ("Tools" is too little precise). > > > - Rename Config page "Commands" to either "Tools" or "External > > Programs" > > To be consistent, the previous "Build -> Programs" should then be replaced by > "Build -> External Programs". The "External" adjective is nice IMO but may be > confusing for beginners (but could help them to learn that TXS and LaTeX are > not the same! ;) > -- > Denis > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-05 05:34:47
|
Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 17h40, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not > > mixed with more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so > > on. > > What sould be added? I don't see what you would need for the three > above cases. They are not mixed with the editor marcos. Do you want > the editor macros to be separated in simple Text > insertion/replacement and more complex functions? Yes, in the spirit of normal/advanced options of TXS config. > > have in mind here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor > > Macro" to distinguish from "LaTeX Macro". > > "Application macro" is from here > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_%28computer_science%29, although > we do not have a recorder, but only scripting capabilities. "Editor > macro" would be equally good. OK. > > It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens > > or for personal (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be > > related to the editor would be called "Editor Macro" > > I think distinguishing between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is a bit > subtle. Not that much, see below. > "LaTeX Macro" and "Editor Macro" would be better, but its > more verbose. Yes and, if (sub)menus title, a single word is preferable. > And still, while technically both are macros, in the context of use > they are quite different. Therefore I proposed "Command" and "Macro", > because they are two completely different In this case, the current "Macro(s)" top level menu would become "Command(s)" which may be confused with "Compilation(s)" (pdflatex, biber, etc.). Moreover, the distinction between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is much less confusing than what would come from "Macro" implicitly standing for "Editor Macro" instead of LaTeX stuff: I'm pretty sure a lot of TXS users would think "Macro" stands for "LaTeX Macro" or, in the best case, hesitate about what it is referring to. What about: * "LaTeX Macro" -> "(LaTeX) Macro" * "Editor Macro" -> "(Editor) Action"? where the parenthesis indicate that the word could be added in case of possible confusion (depending on the context). -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-05 16:28:33
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2012 07:35 > > Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 17h40, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > > one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not > > > mixed with more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so on. > > > > What sould be added? I don't see what you would need for the three > > above cases. They are not mixed with the editor marcos. Do you want > > the editor macros to be separated in simple Text insertion/replacement > > and more complex functions? > > Yes, in the spirit of normal/advanced options of TXS config. We could redesign the dialog in that way. > > > have in mind here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor > > > Macro" to distinguish from "LaTeX Macro". > > > > "Application macro" is from here > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_%28computer_science%29, although we > > do not have a recorder, but only scripting capabilities. "Editor > > macro" would be equally good. > > OK. > > > > It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens > > > or for personal (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be > > > related to the editor would be called "Editor Macro" > > > > I think distinguishing between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is a bit > > subtle. > > Not that much, see below. > > > "LaTeX Macro" and "Editor Macro" would be better, but its more > > verbose. > > Yes and, if (sub)menus title, a single word is preferable. > > > And still, while technically both are macros, in the context of use > > they are quite different. Therefore I proposed "Command" and "Macro", > > because they are two completely different > > In this case, the current "Macro(s)" top level menu would become > "Command(s)" which may be confused with "Compilation(s)" (pdflatex, biber, > etc.). Conversely, the idea was to leave the current "Macro" menu as is and use "Commands" for latex commands, Though we did not have a strict convention on this until now, this is already the most used term in TXS. Btw.: In part we are discussing a non-issue. There is no direct use of (Latex) "Command / Macro" in the menus. In other places where it might be ambiguous we can use the long form. > Moreover, the distinction between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is much less > confusing than what would come from "Macro" implicitly standing for "Editor > Macro" instead of LaTeX stuff: I'm pretty sure a lot of TXS users would think > "Macro" stands for "LaTeX Macro" or, in the best case, hesitate about what it is > referring to. > > What about: > > * "LaTeX Macro" -> "(LaTeX) Macro" > * "Editor Macro" -> "(Editor) Action"? I find "Action" a bit too unspecific. Then I'd rather stick with the long "Editor Macros" in the menu. Alternatively "Scripts", but on the other hand, thats a bit too specific for the simple command insertion. Are there any opinions from other people around? > where the parenthesis indicate that the word could be added in case of possible > confusion (depending on the context). > -- > Denis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Benito v. d. Z. <be...@be...> - 2012-07-06 09:21:47
|
A problem with "Macros" as menu title is that it is breaking the Alt+U shortcut to open the menu. And Alt+M is already used for math. We could name it Macr&us Or Marc&us On 07/05/2012 06:28 PM, Tim Hoffmann wrote: >> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2012 07:35 >> >> Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 17h40, >> "Tim Hoffmann"<hof...@hi...> a écrit : >> >>>> one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not >>>> mixed with more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so on. >>> What sould be added? I don't see what you would need for the three >>> above cases. They are not mixed with the editor marcos. Do you want >>> the editor macros to be separated in simple Text insertion/replacement >>> and more complex functions? >> Yes, in the spirit of normal/advanced options of TXS config. > We could redesign the dialog in that way. > >>>> have in mind here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor >>>> Macro" to distinguish from "LaTeX Macro". >>> "Application macro" is from here >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_%28computer_science%29, although we >>> do not have a recorder, but only scripting capabilities. "Editor >>> macro" would be equally good. >> OK. >> >>>> It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens >>>> or for personal (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be >>>> related to the editor would be called "Editor Macro" >>> I think distinguishing between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is a bit >>> subtle. >> Not that much, see below. >> >>> "LaTeX Macro" and "Editor Macro" would be better, but its more >>> verbose. >> Yes and, if (sub)menus title, a single word is preferable. >> >>> And still, while technically both are macros, in the context of use >>> they are quite different. Therefore I proposed "Command" and "Macro", >>> because they are two completely different >> In this case, the current "Macro(s)" top level menu would become >> "Command(s)" which may be confused with "Compilation(s)" (pdflatex, biber, >> etc.). > Conversely, the idea was to leave the current "Macro" menu as is and use > "Commands" for latex commands, Though we did not have a strict convention on > this until now, this is already the most used term in TXS. Btw.: In part we > are discussing a non-issue. There is no direct use of (Latex) "Command / > Macro" in the menus. In other places where it might be ambiguous we can use > the long form. > >> Moreover, the distinction between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is much less >> confusing than what would come from "Macro" implicitly standing for > "Editor >> Macro" instead of LaTeX stuff: I'm pretty sure a lot of TXS users would > think >> "Macro" stands for "LaTeX Macro" or, in the best case, hesitate about what > it is >> referring to. >> >> What about: >> >> * "LaTeX Macro" -> "(LaTeX) Macro" >> * "Editor Macro" -> "(Editor) Action"? > I find "Action" a bit too unspecific. Then I'd rather stick with the long > "Editor Macros" in the menu. Alternatively "Scripts", but on the other hand, > that’s a bit too specific for the simple command insertion. > > Are there any opinions from other people around? > > > >> where the parenthesis indicate that the word could be added in case of > possible >> confusion (depending on the context). >> -- >> Denis >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat >> landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will >> include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. >> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> TeXstudio-list mailing list >> TeX...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-06 17:54:17
|
> Von: Benito van der Zander [mailto:be...@be...] > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Juli 2012 11:26 > > > A problem with "Macros" as menu title is that it is breaking the Alt+U shortcut > to open the menu. > > And Alt+M is already used for math. > > We could name it Macr&us > > Or Marc&us I'm not in favor of such puns. It will not facilitate an easy understanding what's behind that menu for the user. We could switch the shortcut to M&acros or Ma&cros. Or we go back to "&User Macros" or "&User Tags". It's not that I didn't ask your opinions _before_ switching the name. > On 07/05/2012 06:28 PM, Tim Hoffmann wrote: > >> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2012 07:35 > >> > >> Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 17h40, > >> "Tim Hoffmann"<hof...@hi...> a écrit : > >> > >>>> one but it could be easily added to TXS and, therefore, maybe not > >>>> mixed with more advanced TXS features as events, scripts and so on. > >>> What sould be added? I don't see what you would need for the three > >>> above cases. They are not mixed with the editor marcos. Do you want > >>> the editor macros to be separated in simple Text > >>> insertion/replacement and more complex functions? > >> Yes, in the spirit of normal/advanced options of TXS config. > > We could redesign the dialog in that way. > > > >>>> have in mind here... If I understand well, I would suggest "Editor > >>>> Macro" to distinguish from "LaTeX Macro". > >>> "Application macro" is from here > >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_%28computer_science%29, although > >>> we do not have a recorder, but only scripting capabilities. "Editor > >>> macro" would be equally good. > >> OK. > >> > >>>> It is the reason I suggest to use "Macro", either for latex tokens > >>>> or for personal (LaTeX) macros. And, once again, what will be > >>>> related to the editor would be called "Editor Macro" > >>> I think distinguishing between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is a bit > >>> subtle. > >> Not that much, see below. > >> > >>> "LaTeX Macro" and "Editor Macro" would be better, but its more > >>> verbose. > >> Yes and, if (sub)menus title, a single word is preferable. > >> > >>> And still, while technically both are macros, in the context of use > >>> they are quite different. Therefore I proposed "Command" and > >>> "Macro", because they are two completely different > >> In this case, the current "Macro(s)" top level menu would become > >> "Command(s)" which may be confused with "Compilation(s)" (pdflatex, > >> biber, etc.). > > Conversely, the idea was to leave the current "Macro" menu as is and > > use "Commands" for latex commands, Though we did not have a strict > > convention on this until now, this is already the most used term in > > TXS. Btw.: In part we are discussing a non-issue. There is no direct > > use of (Latex) "Command / Macro" in the menus. In other places where > > it might be ambiguous we can use the long form. > > > >> Moreover, the distinction between "Macro" and "Editor Macro" is much > >> less confusing than what would come from "Macro" implicitly standing > >> for > > "Editor > >> Macro" instead of LaTeX stuff: I'm pretty sure a lot of TXS users > >> would > > think > >> "Macro" stands for "LaTeX Macro" or, in the best case, hesitate about > >> what > > it is > >> referring to. > >> > >> What about: > >> > >> * "LaTeX Macro" -> "(LaTeX) Macro" > >> * "Editor Macro" -> "(Editor) Action"? > > I find "Action" a bit too unspecific. Then I'd rather stick with the > > long "Editor Macros" in the menu. Alternatively "Scripts", but on the > > other hand, thats a bit too specific for the simple command insertion. > > > > Are there any opinions from other people around? > > > > > > > >> where the parenthesis indicate that the word could be added in case > >> of > > possible > >> confusion (depending on the context). > >> -- > >> Denis > >> > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------ > > -- > >> Live Security Virtual Conference > >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > >> Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the > >> latest in malware > > threats. > >> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> TeXstudio-list mailing list > >> TeX...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------- > > Live Security Virtual Conference > > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > > Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the > > latest in malware threats. > > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > > _______________________________________________ > > TeXstudio-list mailing list > > TeX...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-06 18:03:00
|
Le vendredi 06/07/12 à 19h53, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > We could switch the shortcut to M&acros or Ma&cros. Yes. -- Denis |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-07 06:28:28
|
Le vendredi 06/07/12 à 23h38, Benito van der Zander <be...@be...> a écrit : > We should also consider the translations. I take the liberty to adapt the shortcuts when translating in French. > In M&acros the shortcut is A, but A is already used twice in the > German version. (and why is it used twice? perhaps we should one of > them) A letter used twice as a shortcut should be avoided but is not a big problem as it is enough to press the shortcut twice to reach the second menu. -- Denis |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-05 05:20:18
|
Le mercredi 04/07/12 à 10h44, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > - Tools/Commands of external programs like pdflatex, biblatex BTW, biblatex is not a command: it is a package. I guess you meant bibtex(8) or biber. -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-02 10:33:55
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 07:55 > > Hi, > > in "User Tags" -> "Edit User Tags", the strings "Key replacement: % before > word" and "Key replacement: % after word" are not translated. > > BTW, those default user tags remain a bit mysterious for me and, IMO: > > 1. they aren't user tags since they are default tags; Strictly speaking, they are not tags either. But I don't know a good alternative right now. > 2. they should be better documented. What about an extra field (in > addition to "Name", "Abbreviation", "Trigger", "Type", "LaTeX > Content" ones) where comments about the tags could be entered either > by TXS team for those default tags or by the user for its own tags? Yes. See http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3534297&group_id=250595&atid =1126427 |
From: Denis B. <dbi...@wa...> - 2012-07-02 11:05:31
|
Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h33, "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > Strictly speaking, they are not tags either. Agreed. > But I don't know a good alternative right now. Anyway, IMO, they shouldn't be defined in this "User (Tags|Macros)" dialog box but rather in "Options -> Configure TXS -> Shortcuts", no? -- Denis |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-02 11:56:35
|
> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 13:05 > > Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h33, > "Tim Hoffmann" <hof...@hi...> a écrit : > > > Strictly speaking, they are not tags either. > > Agreed. > > > But I don't know a good alternative right now. > > Anyway, IMO, they shouldn't be defined in this "User (Tags|Macros)" > dialog box but rather in "Options -> Configure TXS -> Shortcuts", no? Config -> Shortcuts is just the assignment of a key sequence to an already defined action. Tags/Macros is much more complicated, it can insert tags, replace text, and much more using scripts. You can debate, if that "edit user tags" should not be in the menu, but in a separate section of the options. But that's a philosophical question and I do not have a strong opinion on this. You can equally ask, if the Bibtex/Biblatex switch should be in the options dialog. Or conversely, if Show Whitespace shouldn't be easier accessible via the menu. > -- > Denis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |
From: Benito v. d. Z. <be...@be...> - 2012-07-02 12:27:42
|
> You can debate, if that "edit user tags" should not > be in the menu, but in a separate section of the options. Actually we could remove the menu completely and put the "edit tags" in the config dialog and tags itself somewhere else (idefix/latex/...) On 07/02/12 13:56, Tim Hoffmann wrote: >> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] >> Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 13:05 >> >> Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h33, >> "Tim Hoffmann"<hof...@hi...> a écrit : >> >>> Strictly speaking, they are not tags either. >> Agreed. >> >>> But I don't know a good alternative right now. >> Anyway, IMO, they shouldn't be defined in this "User (Tags|Macros)" >> dialog box but rather in "Options -> Configure TXS -> Shortcuts", no? > Config -> Shortcuts is just the assignment of a key sequence to an already > defined action. > Tags/Macros is much more complicated, it can insert tags, replace text, and > much more using scripts. You can debate, if that "edit user tags" should not > be in the menu, but in a separate section of the options. But that's a > philosophical question and I do not have a strong opinion on this. You can > equally ask, if the Bibtex/Biblatex switch should be in the options dialog. > Or conversely, if Show Whitespace shouldn't be easier accessible via the > menu. > >> -- >> Denis >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat >> landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will >> include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. >> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> TeXstudio-list mailing list >> TeX...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > |
From: Tim H. <hof...@hi...> - 2012-07-02 14:33:18
|
> Von: Benito van der Zander [mailto:be...@be...] > Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 14:32 > > > You can debate, if that "edit user tags" should not be in the menu, > > but in a separate section of the options. > > Actually we could remove the menu completely and put the "edit tags" in the > config dialog and tags itself somewhere else (idefix/latex/...) I wouldn't mind, if it keeps a separate top level entry. Actually it's a bit more general than just a latex tag, e.g. you could have a script that is started on load. So if you want to move it, then to Idefix please. > On 07/02/12 13:56, Tim Hoffmann wrote: > >> Von: Denis Bitouzé [mailto:dbi...@wa...] > >> Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juli 2012 13:05 > >> > >> Le lundi 02/07/12 à 12h33, > >> "Tim Hoffmann"<hof...@hi...> a écrit : > >> > >>> Strictly speaking, they are not tags either. > >> Agreed. > >> > >>> But I don't know a good alternative right now. > >> Anyway, IMO, they shouldn't be defined in this "User (Tags|Macros)" > >> dialog box but rather in "Options -> Configure TXS -> Shortcuts", no? > > Config -> Shortcuts is just the assignment of a key sequence to an > > already defined action. > > Tags/Macros is much more complicated, it can insert tags, replace > > text, and much more using scripts. You can debate, if that "edit user > > tags" should not be in the menu, but in a separate section of the > > options. But that's a philosophical question and I do not have a > > strong opinion on this. You can equally ask, if the Bibtex/Biblatex switch > should be in the options dialog. > > Or conversely, if Show Whitespace shouldn't be easier accessible via > > the menu. > > > >> -- > >> Denis > >> > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------ > > -- > >> Live Security Virtual Conference > >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > >> Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the > >> latest in malware > > threats. > >> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> TeXstudio-list mailing list > >> TeX...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------- > > Live Security Virtual Conference > > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > > Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the > > latest in malware threats. > > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > > _______________________________________________ > > TeXstudio-list mailing list > > TeX...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat > landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will > include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. > http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > TeXstudio-list mailing list > TeX...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/texstudio-list |