On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 11:34:24PM +0300, Eran Tromer wrote:
> >> http://dl.tromer.org/nested.png
>
> This prefers logical behavior to visual behavior, in contradiction to
> what you said earlier. Visually, the thing directly below the cursor is
> the inset, so if you want visual behavior then that's where <Down>
> should go.
Sorry I'm afraid you're quite wrong. Imagine the cursor is of infinite
height. It wouldn't enter the footnote. So how can it possibly be
below it ?
You argue for "visual" behaviour and then claim that "to the right and
down a little bit" means "down". That won't wash with me :)
> Anyway, if what you write *is* the intended rule, then it fails when
> there's some text before the footnote -- pressing <Down> while in that
> text *does* go into the inset (in fact, it goes into the nested ERT
> inset, which is wrong any way you look at it).
No because then the cursor and the inset are on different visual rows
and hence down goes down on to the next row. The fact that internally
it's the "same" row is irrelevant. It should go into the footnote not
ERT though, I agree there. But that's so minor as to not be even worth
thinking about IMHO
regards
john
--
"When the patent office gets into the game, "new" means "we don't have
it in our files", and "unobvious" means unobvious to someone with an IQ
of 50."
- Richard Stallman
