Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> I don't deny you want to memorize those things. I just say
Abdelrazak> that the document is not the place to do this. This is a
Abdelrazak> BufferView thing, not a Buffer thing. And if you want to
Abdelrazak> save those visual information you should save them in the
Abdelrazak> session file not in the document file.
When you receive a document from someone, do you really prefer to have
all ERT as 'Open' instead of inline?
I really don't care about how this someone is visualizing _his_ version
of the document. Imagine that we are collaborating in the writting of a
document using SVN. You click on some insets because *you* prefer it
that way and then commit the resulting changed document. Then I "svn
update" and I see that the insets that I opened are sudenly closed and
others that I prefer closed are sudenly opened. Just because *you* don't
have the same preference as me. I am repeating myself but, theoretically
speaking, pragmatically speaking, logically speaking, the inset status
is not a document information.
Or are we going to have some
subtle algorithm to decide how notes, footnotes ERT (with only one
paragraph or with several) should appear?
We could have a different default behaviour defined in Inset that could
be overriden by each inset class optionally yes.
The current solution (which I reverted to and was like that since
1.4.0 or even 1.3.0) is not correct theoretically speaking, but it is
pragmatically the best.
I disagree but that's nothing we can change now.
Abdel.
