Richard Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I believe this may fix a bug that had to do with the numbering of > sections included in inactive branches. I.e.: LyX numbers the > subsequent sections as if they were active. (Of course, the output is > correct.) If not, that ought to be easy to fix at this point, though > I'm not sure what we ought to about numbering those sections. Maybe > just "?"?
The way it is done now is kind of on purpose, because I did not have a better idea. If people believe that removing numbering is better, I can do that. But then, what shall I do about Enumerate? JMarc
