On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:44:48PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: > Martin Vermeer wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:42:35AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: > > > >>Richard Heck wrote: > >> > >>>Without meaning to prejudge the question whether CharStyles should be > >>>insets, here's my list of things that ought to be done if they are > >>>going to stay that way. They are addressed specifically to what Abdel > >>>was calling the "look and feel" aspect of charstyles, which are in > >>>principle independent of the underlying representation. There are > >>>reasons to like the inset representation, as I and others have said > >>>elsewhere. So it seems at least worth opening a discussion about how, > >>>to borrow some language from JMarc, the underlying data structure > >>>could be hidden from the user and charstyles integrated more directly > >>>into the editing process. > >>> > >>>So here's my list. Feel free to add to it, etc. Maybe it should go on > >>>the wiki. I think if a handful of us committed ourselves to sorting > >>>this out, it could be done fairly quickly. > >>>1. There should be an "Invisible" geometry for charstyle insets, in > >>>which they simply draw the text and give no other indication that the > >>>text so drawn is any different from any other text. Invisible should > >>>be the default, unless overridden in the layout file. It should be > >>>possible to toggle this globally. Perhaps mouseover should cause some > >>>sort of visible change, too, to make the insets "discoverable". > >>> > >>How about having insets normally invisible, but having the boundaries > >>appear > >>in some way whenever the cursor goes inside? That way we > >>don't break up reading normally, but we see the boundaries when editing, > >>and that is the time this is necessary. > >> > >>Helge Hafting > >> > > > >Like this? > > > Almost! A text with many charstyles is now much easier to read. > > The only thing I could ask for here, is to see the borders also when > the cursor is right in front of the inset, because the "delete" key > will delete the entire inset if used at that point. That is obvious if > the frame is there, not so if it isn't.
Thinking it over a little more, consider this an object lesson in the utility of visible inset frames ;-) Are you sure you couldn't live with those little corners? - Martin
