On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 6:22:58 AM UTC-6, Edward K. Ream wrote: > > > One problem arose yesterday: what should @clones nodes contain? My > initial thought was that they should contain unl's of a node in the > imported @auto tree. My next thought was that they should contain gnx's of > nodes outside the @auto tree. > > Both approaches have problems. In fact, @clones nodes should contain > both, as pairs of lines. One line will have a gnx of a node outside the > @auto tree; the other will have a unl to a node within the @auto tree. > This scheme will maximize the probability of creating the intended link. >
Rev 6486 demonstrates relinking for the first time. The code is extremely simple. Another design question arises: what happens if the body text of the to-be-linked clones don't match? At present, the code simply refuses to do the link, but other alternatives are possible: 1. Relink, setting the body text of the node outside the @auto tree to the body text of the corresponding node inside the @auto tree. This will be completely safe if no clone of the node outside the @auto tree appears in any @<file> tree. 2. Relink, and save the body text of the node outside the @auto tree in a "Recovered nodes" outline, as is done at present in other situations. This issue is far from a show-stopper in any event. Edward > > Edward > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
