> > This is still problematic:
> > You cannot create a single (latex) { or a single }.
>
> They have to be balanced anyway, so why should one be able to insert a
> single one? For this trick to "comment out" parts of a formula?
> It will get read back as a "ScopeInset" anyway... I think the situation is
> similar to ERT outside mathed. Not every hack that was possible in 1.1.6
> can live in documents with a more rigid structure.
Yes. I do use this tricks in my files.
So what am I suppose to do now with these files ??
Any why you call it a hack? This is a legal latex code.
> And we want that rigid structure, because it enables us to read things like
> \over, \choose and \cal properly - which I value much higher.
But why do you need to read those commands ? This is TeX syntax, not latex.
If you want to improve reading of latex files, you can improve reLyX.
There is no need to support this in mathed.
> > Furthermore, why did you change the behavior of the { key ?
>
> For the sake of consistency:
> You want a \{ in the output? - You have to type \{ in the input.
But mathed is not consistent with latex.
For example, you don't need to press the { key when typing \frac{1}{2}.
I think that it is more important to have a simple UI, than to have
consistency with latex.
