Re: [Texmacs-dev] Various issues with 1.0.0.6

[Joris van der Hoeven]

> What are folded, superpose and switch meant to do? I have not found that
> explained neither in the accompanying doc nor in the online doc. If you,
> Joris, could give a brief explanation, I would test the new features and
> also send you a spanish translation of the interface up to date with
> 1.0.0.6.

I have no time to write the docs for the moment, so please try and find out...

> I haven't found the new documentation about interfaces in the online
> documentation. I spotted some errata and would gladly correct it in the
> CVS.

It's in the standard help.

> One note more about the online doc: it seems to use a not-so-standard
> font (at least my Debian standard TeTeX doesn't find it...). I suggest
> using the most standard font (cmr?) for the online doc, so that newbies
> don't read their first error message in the console when loading the
> online doc.

It uses the standard fonts and in any case the same ones as the usual help.
I don't understand what the problem is.

> For me TeXmacs completely blows up when invoking "presentation mode",
> even with an empty document.

Please give me more details.
Did you use Options -> view -> presentation mode-> on ?

> Related to David's suggestions about keybindings... I mostly agree,
> although I think that what is the "next environment" should be part of
> the "behaviour sheet" of the style. That is something you can do in
> openoffice: select which is the "logically next" environment for a given
> one.

Please put that on the wish list. This will be done when we will have time.

> That is in the line of the TeXmacs: structure + presentation + behaviour
> decoupled motto. However it is true that a given presentation is
> attached to each document but behaviours should be attached to user
> profiles, not documents. 

This too will be implemented when we have time,
but we can not exceed the speed of light when implementing things.

> One final comment regarding keybindigs: from user input I gather that
> one of the most useful bindings would be to multiple-line equations (in
> absence of the cycling mechanism). Could it be done with multiple $?
> Also, my spanish keyboard doesn't seem to have a pound sign... so prog
> mode is accesible only from the mouse. Just to let you know.

We will have a cycling mechanism, but we need time first.

<Joris>