On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 07:00:41PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > >>Not at all. I genuinely don't understand how anybody could think that > >>editing equations is like editing prose. > > Well, I am a scientist and I often have the need to apply the same style > to some specific words. These words are independent entities for me, I > don't want to split them or half select them. Is it a bit clearer or is > my use case completely strange?
Your use case is completely understandable. Indeed, I expect that's how a lot of markup will work, /but significantly less than all/. All the other objections still apply. We need to cater for "I'm just marking words, really" /along with/ the other cases. Insets make this hard, and words-as-insets make this even harder, unless you abandon things like sensible cursor movement and selection as it seems you want to. > >(I'd love to be able to capture proof on this via mouse movements, eye > >tracking etc. but I'm hardly capable of such a set up.) > > I don't follow you here... I'd love to be able to prove that people interact with prose text differently from equations, by getting a lab and measuring it. Unfortunately I don't know of any studies and clearly I can't do it myself. regards john
