Associating markup with particular words in ON Grant Robertson <BOGUS[ at ]BOGUS.com> 13.07.2006 02:14:44 In article <e$pfjwgpGHA.4192[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>, taesler[ at ]gmx.de says... [Quoted Text] > In so far a big difference to how ink works in Word (which actually - > contary to ON - was not designed for that). The annotation stays with > the text there. I have found that it only seems to associate with the start of a line in Word. If you add some words before the word you circled in a line then the circle will not move. It is still better than ON in that you can add stuff to previous paragraphs and the circle follows the word perfectly. If we did want annotations to stick with a particular word they would definitely have to provide a way for the user to indicate which word it was to stick to. Trying to guess would be nothing but an exercise in frustration. Perhaps it could be a separate function that the user could use if they wanted to. You couldn't just link any mark with the word under that mark. A simple arrow with an arrowhead may get split up if the words move. You should be able to select a bunch of marks, group them, then attach them to a particular word or paragraph. If they aren't attached to a word then they would just be floaters that merely sit at particular x-y coordinates on the page.

Re: Associating markup with particular words in ON "Rainald Taesler" <taesler[ at ]gmx.de> 13.07.2006 14:55:00 Grant Robertson <BOGUS[ at ]BOGUS.com> shared these words of wisdom: [Quoted Text] >> In so far a big difference to how ink works in Word (which >> actually - contrary to ON - was not designed for that). The >> annotation stays with the text there. > > I have found that it only seems to associate with the start of a > line in Word. ... Seems be broken off another branch. Will have to check things again. Rainald