On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 01:22:53AM +0100, John Levon wrote: > > With templates we can have a .layout keyword. For documents in general, > either the change tracking, or the standard Undo/Revert stuff will do > IMO.
Not sure I get your point about .layout. The problem I'm thinking about is the unsophisticated deleting ERT inserts while working on text. Undo/Revert doesn't survive a document save. > > Consider other ways to customize LaTeX, such as the preamble or > > Layout->Document settings. You cannot affect *these* by casual erasure. > > Sure you can. Erase the wrong bit, then "OK", and it's gone. Not casual erasure while editing text. These are accessible only through detailed menu items, and therefore "protected" in a sense. > Why the minipage ? I don't get the use case here. At the moment, we use minipage to "protect" top-line, intermediate and ending text for complex documents. A straightforward example might be a letterhead with fixed topline, addressing and closing elements. Certain portions of the page might be protected from casual alteration, but not casual erasure, by enclosure in minipages. However, not all such enclosures need the minipage environment, introducing formatting headaches if used just to prevent casual alteration. Not a great example, but I hope it makes the point. > > But at least it removes the canned text (along with ERT widgets) from view. > > are you talking about it being removed altogether from the visual display ? It appears as "minipage" at various points in the UI, which is fine, but it is too easily deleted. I'd prefer a "Protected" inset not easily deleted, that does NOT place the enclosed text or other insets into any LaTeX environment like minipage.
