On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 10:03:49AM +0100, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > >> For text, the other is 1.3.x behaviour. If you insist on yours, I think > >> we should fix things a bit, because we don't allow selections ending at > >> different levels, so the start of the selection has to be adjusted. > > > > I don't insist on 'mine' right now. Just making it works as 1.3.x is > > good enough. But I want to get there in the long run... > > Ok. > > >> [I don't think it's so important for text anyway] > > > > I think it will get more important as soon as we get mor sub-paragraph > > insets (character styles, fonts, ...) > > This is true. > I was a bit reluctant because I was thinking some awful table behaviour I've > suffered: if the mouse goes out, the selection jumps to a higher level,
That's what math does.. > but there's no going back, so you are normally stuck with a > selection bigger than what you want. Mathed behaviour is nice (I > didn't noticed ;-), because it allows going back. And I think the math selection scheme is even simpler than the one used outside (just cursor + selection anchor, instead of cursor + selection beging + selection end), but I fear we'd break too much if we touched 'outer world selection' right now. (Gee, at what time did I fall into the 'careful' camp?) [This is not to discourage you, but rather saying that I won't be able to offer more than moral support. Note that for full IU we'd need a 'selection unification' as well, so at some point of time we need to go there...] Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
