On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 07:45:17PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > For one LFUN_INSET_TOGGLE did not have an associated name, I fixed this in > r23884. Problem is that C-i is binded to LFUN_NEXT_INSET_TOGGLE not > LFUN_INSET_TOGGLE... maybe we should merge the two LFUN?
Well, there would be a problem in the following case xxxx [nested inset yyyy |[second level zzz] yyy] xxx Cursor at '|', should inset level 1 or 2 be toggled? I think having both is ok, they should just act the same if there's no ambiguity (i.e. no 'toggleable' inset immediately behind cursor) Andre'
