13 Nov
2007
13 Nov
'07
4:07 p.m.
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:57:29 -0400, "bulia byak" <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
My feeling is that such "bypassing" should be simply eliminated, or at least minimized. If something changes the document, it must be undoable. If it makes no sense to be undoable, it must not change the document.
Very strongly agreed; bypassing undo for some changes also creates problems in that it introduces discontinuities in the undo logs, which destroy many useful properties.
A few things for which undo is currently bypassed have no business being in the XML tree at all -- the most egregious example is sodipodi:modified.
-mental