do you need some more comments? Ok, here are mine :-)
> Yes, box removing by <Backspace> is 'direct manipulation' according to > this definition.
> Nobody, not a single person! complained about this since 1.3.0 is out. > I am really tempted to call this argument 'FUD'.
Personally, I have no problem with this feature. Although I consider myself a power-user, I have never noticed it in mathed. This also means that it has never been an obstacle when writing some formula :-)
HOWEVER... and now I will make you very angry ... I don't like the CharStyle inset approach at all - at least in the way it is planned at the moment.
Insets are an appropriate means for structured editing but they are not suitable for writing consecutive text. If I had had to insert an inset for every emphasized term, for every capitalized product name, for every keyword in typewriter font, and for every figure reference in sans serif in my PhD, I would have jumped out of the window!!!
But instead of starting a discussion on how to display insets in the most comfortable way, we have to clarify the general concepts of character styles first. IMHO there should be no fixed set of char styles. Instead the user should be able to define his own styles and change them later (similar to branches). This, of course, requires additional dialogs, etc. etc.
So... do we really want such a mammoth project while LyX is broken at each corner? Last night, I worked four hours on a simple insetcollapsable/insertert code merge just to find out that the crashes I experienced also occur with the latest cvs :-( (The fact that my 1Ghz 128MB computer spent more than half of the time on compiling and swapping did not improve my bad mood).
Shouldn't we concentrate on bug fixing rather than starting new projects?
Michael
