On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 12:22:05AM +0100, Duncan Simpson wrote:
> Do I understand the design? I think the design is that an event invokes the
> local inset's dispatch() function, which either handles it or passes it up to
> it's parent inset. If this is not the design dare I suggest this is what it
> should be?
I think that's what it should be, too, but I am not too sure about the
current state... ;-)
> Things like end would work everywhere for free, presumably because
> nothing special catches it so it ends up being handled by a global inset
> that catches everything nobody else handles.
>
> This requires nestable insets with a parent pointer or reference,
No, it does not. It just requires that we can get hold of the nesting
sequence _somehow_. Putting a parent pointer in each inset is certainly a
solution, but not the nicest I can think of.
> but nestable insets are the right thing anyway if LyX wants to move a
> subset of *TeX format or it is important to easily generate natural *TeX.
> It might be moderately easy to leave the big switch in place while insets
> are being converted.
That's no TeX or no-TeX question, it's a question for any kind of logical
markup (i.e. also HTML, XML etc).
> Unfortunately I am not in a position to volunteer right now... too much
> thesis clean up and a bastion host needs a really solid http gateway to
> forward "safe" requests to "internal" servers ("safe" means things like
> no nulls, no ..\, no unicode and that sort of thing). Once those are out
> of way I might look into a maximal corresondance generator for two LyX
> buffers and see whether someone follows up with a GUI.
What's that?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
