Re: enriched-mode and switching major modes.

[Alex Schroeder]

Oliver Scholz <address@hidden> writes:

> But I have to start somewhere.  The tree interface to this kind of
> documents is well known and tested in practice.  Almost every
> specification talks about trees.  So if there are no principal
> objections to improving Emacs to better work with trees-in-a-buffer in
> the long run, I think that I fare better by assuming a tree-interface.

One of the problems you described was keeping a tree and the buffer in
sync.  If you had a way of regenerating the tree based on the text in
the buffer when saving a file, would that not be enough?

Alex.
-- 
.O.  http://www.emacswiki.org/alex/
..O  Schroeder's fifth law:
OOO  Never accept more work than you can handle in one night of hacking.