On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 12:32:51PM +0200, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote:
> > Clear now?
>
> No, it's not clear why we should spent energy to impose such a restriction?
I guess so. :)
When I first refer to word, I was refering to a set of chars, where a blank is
allowed.
I was placing a distinction between paragraph level and char level. So the middle
range atributtes I talk are greater (or equal) than char but not a paragraph.
That is why it is natural to talk about insets.
It was my mistake here, not to make the meaning of word clear in the context.
Second attempt, is this clear now? ;)
> Language might be word boundary property (this is not certain), but I don't
> think that it's important enough to reflect this in the data structure. My
> gut feeling says that this is too complex to be worth it.
> I understand that it is important to have "middle range attributes", but
> it is not important to impose that they should have word boundaries only.
That doesn't make sense to me either, too much work and almost no gain!
> I think it's more important to recognize the similarity with font attributes,
> just like HTML does with the <span> property, and thus reduce complexity.
In the case of Country (or Name) do you think that it should be implemented
as a font attribute (or similar) or as an inset?
Those insets should be configurated from the layout files,
one step further to WYSIWYM.
Important also to this model is the possibility to have insets inside other
insets.
> Greets,
>
> Asger
Best regards,
--
José
