Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Georg Baum wrote: >> No. If the nicefrac is in an array I expect that pressing "down" in the >> numerator goes to the next row of the array and not to the demoninator. >> More specifically, I expect that the cursor goes to the inset in the next >> row that is at the same x position. If it is not in an array I expect the >> cursor to go out of the formula. If the down button would go right, how >> would I be supposed to really go down? > > By pressing down twice.
And if the 2 would be replaced by another inset with the supposed behaviour of nicefrac I should press down 3 times to go down and possibly one or two times left because I landed too much right in the next row? >> If navigating would be done logically and not visually it would be very >> confusing IMHO. > > Well it would not be confusing for me. It's a matter of taste I guess. Probably. > XML could help us for that because we won't need to do the logic > calculation inside LyX. The logic would be embedded in the format. I don't understand. How would XML differ from the nested structure of insets that we already have in mathed? I hope you don't mean something like <nicefrac> <cell logicalrow="0" logicalcol="0">1</cell> <cell logicalrow="1" logicalcol="0">2</cell> </nicefrac> >> That is then an implementation problem. I don't see why it needs to be >> like that. IIRC the brutefind methods were introduced as a fallback hack >> and never intended to be really used, because the normal find methods >> should always work. > > So, anyone remember is there was any plan to replace that. IIRC there was no plan. Andre simply stated that this solution is not good. > The problem here is that sometimes we need something that is not on > screen but that we should have calculated anyway. This happens for > example when you have a formula that is only half displayed at the > bottom of the screen. I am not sure how this is handled by the > CoordCache but it seems that only what is on screen is in the CoordCache > (I might be wrong here). I don't know either, but in that case it should be possible to first scroll a bit and then go down and find the inset. If I press 'down' at the bottom of the screen it is obvious that scrolling is needed, so it could be done first and then it could be found out where exactly the cursor goes. >> I don't know the >> implementation too well, > > I guess nobody really knows... except Andre' :-( And Alfredo. Georg
