Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> I don't see this behaviour with 1.3.2 spellchecking, only with s&r.

Yes. Sorry for not stating it clearer. For spellchecking, your changes are a 
big improvement (since the 1.3 spellchecker opened *any* footnote on his way 
through the document).

> It's also a bit unexpected, as the dialog is modeless: I.e., would make
> different the behaviour of a "find-next" from a first "find". What if the
> inset has been moved, or manually closed, or simply erased inbetween?
> In any case, this is a bit more dificult, I would have to think about it.

How did 1.3 s&r manage this?

> Is it important?

Important? Let's say I like the way s&r works in 1.3. I usually have lots of 
footnotes in my docs and I usually keep them closed. So anything that opens 
my footnotes keeps me from concentrating on my work, since I have to 
"collapse" them out of my way. Of course this is way better now, but I'd 
prefer a method that changes the document's state as less as possible.

(Nevertheless your changes are a huge step forwards!)
J�rgen.

Reply via email to