On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 08:57:18PM +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 September 2007 19:01:48 Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > Providing the corresponding lyx2lyx entry is going to be "interesting".
> But then we need the inset in inset case that André mentioned. After it is
> possible to have word in noun and emphasised right now and we should
> accommodate for that case.
That works just fine. The problem case IIRC is (emph = {}, noun = []):
[aaa { bbb ] ccc}
where we want bbb to be both emph and noun. Cannot be (easily) done with
insets. I would call that a feature: you shouldn't _want_ to do that ;-)
There is no good reason for not having insets inside inside insets. It is an
artificial limitation and it should be lifted. That was the point of my
question. :-)
You can have insets inside insets. I take it that was Martin's point.
The question, I suppose, is whether there are other places you could use
LFUN_FONT_NOUN that you cannot use a charstyle. If so, where?
Richard
--
==================================================================
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==================================================================
Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de
Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC
Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at:
http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
