Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:

>> 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?

To tell you the truth, no idea. I'll look at the code.
 
>> 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.

Ok, if it's a good feature, it's a good feature. I'll keep it in mind (there
are several possible ways of implementing this.)

> (Nevertheless your changes are a huge step forwards!)
> JÃrgen.

Thanks for your support. (and if you detect more regressions, please tell)

Regards, Alfredo.


Reply via email to