Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)

[Kim F. Storm]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>     It would be wrong for preview-latex, probably one of the most
>>     important applications extensively using the display property.
>>
>> With all due respect, I have not been shown a reason to consider
>> that package tremendously important.  All user program are important
>> to some extent, but I don't see why this one should be overridingly
>> so.
>
> Oh, I was not as immodest to claim one of the most important
> applications whatsoever, but only among a particular subset.  It
> actually happens to be rather easy to be "one of the most important
> applications [among those that are] _extensively_ using the display
> property", since there are not many of them.  The only other one I can
> think of right now would be w3, and development of that appears pretty
> much stagnant.

I fully agree with David that we should not make such changes to the
behaviour of the display property that would break _the_ major package
actually using it for anything non-trivial.

Instead we can explicitly put an inivisible property together with the
display property on a priece of "hidden" text which should be ignored
by searches.  That need a little work to check all uses of display
properties, but it doesn't break any old code relying on the current
behaviour.

I don't know whether it actually works to put both invisible and
display on some text (with the effect of showing the image and
ignoring the under-laying text).  Would someone make some examples
to check it?

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk