"Leuven, E." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > so if people think that we should litter the reverted document with > ert just because we can, so be it. but at more conceptual level i > think that this is a perverse result of the possibility of ert.
I do not know what you are talking about, and therefore I think it is a good idea to chime in :) I also think that the heavy use of ERT in reversion is going too far. What about this alternate idea: add a note in the text explaining what got removed. Of course, this raises the problem of localization... JMarc
