Re: Extent boundaries inconsistent w.r.t. extent properties
Nix wrote:
>I don't quite understand what you mean here. Do you want the
>begin-glyph of an extent to be visible even if the extent has the
>'invisible' property set to t? Are you saying that you'd like glyphs
>to always be visible?
That is useful, yes: it lets us easily emulate the `display' property,
which replaces the range of text covered by an overlay temporarily with
an image.
The way it works right now is that if you have two extents
<-- A --><-- B -->
and B is invisible and A is not, and A has an end-glyph, then A's
end-glyph gets hidden.
If B has a begin-glyph, then it is hidden too: if it has an *end* glyph,
then it is not hidden. This strikes me as bizarre, and even though
preview-latex relies upon the end-glyph not being hidden when the text
is invisible, I'd prefer it if neither were hidden.
Right, but if extent B is invisible, are you saying that you want both
of extent B's glyphs to be visible? Or, are you just saying that extent
B's glyphs should be visible iff extent B is visible?