On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 11:10:38AM +0000, Angus Leeming wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > In fact, I'd prefer > > > >> +-----+------------------+ > >> blah blah |inset| text | blah blah > >> +-----+------------------+ > >> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah > > which leaves open the possibility to have > > | +-----+-----------------------------+| > |blah blah |inset| box 1 || > |+---------+-----+ || > || box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 || > || box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 box 2 || > || +------------------------------------+| > || box 3 | blah blah blah blah blah blah blah | > |+--------+ | > |blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah | > > when you move to Asger's "An inset is three boxes" model?
As a possibility. Yes. I find the current method optically far too intrusive for 'small' boxes like footnotes consisting of just three words etc. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
