Font size names

[Daniel]

On 2020-08-10 12:59, Daniel wrote:
> On 2020-08-10 12:42, Daniel wrote:
>> On 2020-08-10 12:08, Kornel Benko wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 11:32:35 +0200
>>> schrieb Daniel <xracoonx at gmx.de>:
>>>
>>>> On 2020-08-10 09:15, Kornel Benko wrote:
>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Aug 2020 08:24:56 +0200
>>>>> schrieb Daniel <xracoonx at gmx.de>:
>>>>>> Attached is a chart of LyX font sizes. Does anyone else find it 
>>>>>> slightly
>>>>>> confusing that LyX uses two different naming schemes (in addition to
>>>>>> LaTeX)? Maybe some historic reason? If possible, I suggest to go for
>>>>>> only one naming scheme.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the LaTeX naming scheme for large font sizes is a bit
>>>>>> non-descriptive (using capitals to indicate 
>>>>>> comparatives/superlatives).
>>>>>> So, I guess that is why there is a deviation from LaTeX. I am 
>>>>>> still not
>>>>>> fully sure that it is a good idea to use different names because 
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> will have to remember two different schemes instead of one.
>>>>>
>>>>> LyX is _not_ latex. It describes the font sizes for a variety of 
>>>>> output
>>>>> formats. Besides, the GUI is translatable. Only the English version 
>>>>> would
>>>>> suit your needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> We do not expect our users are latex experts.
>>>>>> But insofar as the more descriptive names should stay, I suggest to
>>>>>> match Gui and LyX names in the following way (which actually helps to
>>>>>> create less of a rift between LaTeX and LyX):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - "Huger" (Gui name) instead of "Giant" (LyX name) because it matches
>>>>>> better the LaTeX naming (\Huge).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Gui/LaTeX names for smaller font sizes because they are more
>>>>>> descriptive, i.e. "Footnotesize" and "Scriptsize" (LyX name) 
>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>> "Smaller" and "Smallest" (Gui name).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the latter needs some argument: while there is no match of
>>>>>> sectioning sizes to large sizes because they depend on the class,
>>>>>> "footnotesize" and "scriptsize" match the respective sizes in classes
>>>>>> (as far as I know). So, it's helpful to know that if one wants to 
>>>>>> match
>>>>>> other elements in the text.
>>>>
>>>> While LyX _is_ not LaTeX, but isn't it _based on_ LaTeX (ideas).[1] And
>>>> I guess it's the most widely used output format. Also, that LyX is does
>>>> not explain why Gui and LyX names differ.
>>>
>>> Reading Intro.lyx, there is nowhere mentioned latex.
>>> The first line
>>>     LyX is a document preparation system.
>>> describes almost precisely as to what lyx is aimed to.
>>>
>>> Yes, lyx is created also with latex in mind. But since we support 
>>> other formats too,
>>> I don't see why we should be more latex centric.
>>>
>>>> You are right, I forgot about the language translation issues. However,
>>>> I don't see why, at least in English the Gui and LyX names shouldn't
>>>> match. And then be translated from there. Here is a translation 
>>>> friendly
>>>> version of my other suggestions with German examples:
>>>>
>>>> Why doesn't the GUI use the translated version of the LyX name?
>>>
>>> What do you mean (I don't understand the term 'LyX name')?
>>
>> "LyXname" is the name used in LyX's code for size names used in the 
>> layout files. These differ from those used in the GUI, see my 
>> attachment in the first message of the current threat.
>>
>>>> - "Riesiger" instead of "Gigantisch" (Gui and LyX name) because it
>>>> matches better the translated LaTeX naming (\Huge). (Here the German
>>>> version actually differs from the English version in that both Gui and
>>>> LyX names are the same. Good! But "Riesiger" would be a slightly better
>>>> as a translation of LaTeX's Huge, I think.)
>>>
>>> As said, we are not latex.
>>
>> Here is a slightly more elaborate argument:
>>
>> "Riesiger" instead of "Gigantisch" (Gui and LyX name) because it 
>> matches better the translated LaTeX naming (\Huge) *and why not match 
>> it if we already use comparatives such as "larger" anyway*.
>>
>>>> - Translated LyX/LaTeX names (Previously, I mistakenly wrote "Gui name"
>>>> instead of "LyX name") for smaller font sizes because they are more
>>>> descriptive, i.e. "Fußnotengröße" and "Skriptgröße" (translated
>>>> LyX/LaTeX name) instead of "Kleiner" and "Sehr klein" (Gui name).
>>>
>>> More descriptive yes, but the GUI is for a normal user better 
>>> understandable IMHO.
>>
>> Yes, in one way, the GUI is better understandable for a complete 
>> typesetting notice. For example, this person might not know what 
>> "script" means. However, in the font size chooser the sizes are 
>> already ordered, so it might be no problem to deduce this. And 
>> everyone not knowing the LyX internal translation, including the 
>> notice and LaTeX expert, will be lost if they try to match the font 
>> size of a footnote (or script).
>>
>>>> The argument I gave seems to apply independent of translation, I think.
>>>>
>>>> However, if using "footnotesize" and "scriptsize" turn out to be too
>>>> problematic because it does not make sense for some output formats, 
>>>> then
>>>> I suggest to use the English Gui names as LyX names.
>>>>
>>>> In summary, I still don't understand why
>>>>
>>>> 1. LyX names are not _closer_ to LaTeX names,
>>>> 2. English Gui and LyX names differ.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LyX (Though there seem to be some
>>>> mistakes on the page. It claims that the Table Editor and Math Editor
>>>> are WYSIWYG. I guess they are WYSIWYM, strictly speaking.-- 
> 
> ps. Attached is my suggestion. The upshot would be that people familiar 
> with LaTeX would basically have to remember only naming scheme and some 
> names are more descriptive.

Here are the alternatives as I see it:

- Let the LyX names match more the LaTeX names, i.e. "Giant" becomes 
"Huger".
- Let the LyX names match the Gui names (but different from the LaTeX 
names).

I think that at least there is no reason for having *three* different 
schemes.
-- 
Daniel