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)
