Le 15 août 07 à 00:32, Andre Poenitz a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 12:16:47AM +0300, Dov Feldstern wrote:
[..]
The problem is, this is not working --- even now with branches, as I
just found out thanks to your question --- in certain cases which
involve Bidi text (and maybe other kinds of transitions). In other
words, in these situations, for "abc def ghi" I get one output,
and for
"abc [def] ghi" (in which the branch is activated, of course) I get
*different* output. So I'm not saying that we should now go and
implement branches as character attributes rather than insets (though
that may actually not be a bad idea...;) ); but if we're doing this
again in another situation, I say we keep it simple this time.
Have you actually pondered the consequences of an 'all is an inset'
approach? [Serious question, including the ability of the 'three-
box-drawing'
.-----------------.
| |
.----' |
. |
. .---'
. |
`------------------'
This kind of display wouldn't be possible with a char-level approach,
indeed.
Also, merging insets and charstyles, and configuring insets directly
from layout files (if that's actually what's in progress) would
provide very easy solutions with inset-level approach (at least
easier than now).
Mael.
