On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 11:55:39AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > > > >One use case I can think of is a linguist wanting to mark individual > >parts of a sentence. Certain words can be part of several such entities, > >so overlapping might make sense there, and also the "artificial > >splitting workaround" of the pure inset approach might not be really > >feasible. > > > Why wouldn't the artifical splitting work? (Assuming the user > can be allowed to make a selection like that in the first place.)
Because at onw point of time I might be interested in, say, all "noun phrases" in my document. I don't think it would be possible once they are split in smaller parts. > About the only example I can think of, is if the visible markup > cannot be split. For example, if the user wants his ranges > marked with underbraces. But this is an example that > latex can't print anyway, as latex underbraces are hierarchical. I think this can be made working with TeX, but even if not this would be limitation of the backend, LaTeX is not the only one and does not have to be the only one. > bold, italic and underlines can fake partial overlap though, because > you won't notice if a bold/italic/underline interval is split up. Right. Well, basically we have to decide whether we want to support overlapping ranges. If not, I think insets with 3box drawing is the way to go, if it is I do not see a solution other then something near "ordered ranges". Andre'
