On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 06:10:09PM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 10:57:36PM -0700, Kayvan A. Sylvan spake thusly: > > > > Load the document below with current CVS. > > > > Click on the Navigate menu. You will see something like: > > > > _1_ Test > > _2_ Another > > _3_ Section 3 > > 1 Section inside branch > > > > and the message on the console: > > > > Menu warning: menu entry "1 Section inside branch" does not contain shortcut `4'. > > > > It makes no difference if the "Test" branch is active or not. > > > > ---Kayvan > > Actually you shouldn't use Branches like that. My idea was that the > inset should be *in* the Section layout paragraph, not *contain* it. > As you see, also the numbering doesn't work.
Why shouldn't I want to use branches like that, though? My usage is for a section (or even a Chapter) that is included in one version (with the branch enabled) and not included in another version. For example: Imagine an academic book that has a "Teacher's Enhanced Edition" where each Chapter contains a section called "Answers to the exercises" and maybe even an additional Chapter devoted to teaching methods for the overall material. These would all be inside a "Teacher Edition" branch inset. > Is there a way to limit what kind of layouts are admitted within a > particular inset? If so, this is the place to use it. And the inset > should "inherit" the outside, large Section font. How to do that? > > - Martin I don't really agree with limiting this. It certainly breaks the principle of least surprise. The Section numbering on-screen should just continue as normal. In this way, there might be a discrepancy between what you see on screen and the printed version (depending on which branches are enabled), but that's not a problem. ---Kayvan -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)