On Jan 8, 2006, at 7:00 PM, Timothy Bates wrote:
So, my guess is this is an inconsistency introduced by Allen in responding to people thinking "this is no good for html, i can't even close tags. So he is trying to expose some more "built-in" and obvious functionality.
But is the Insert Closing Tag function truly "built-in"? I don't know why it needs to be. Couldn't it be implemented as part of the HTML bundle?
But it is not rational, I agree. I guess the logical thing to do would be to break out all the functionality pertaining to the current scope (i.e, add the "gear" menu on the bottom of the automation menu)
That way the things you probably want (pertinent to your context) will be in the menu, and other stuff as accessible as ever. Trouble is that this would make the menu clumsy and highly visually confusing (changing often).
I don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be. All that's required is to move Insert Closing Tag from the Automation menu into the HTML bundle. That would be a simple change (interface-wise, at least) and would fix all the confusion.
Still, i agree that sticking close-tag on the end is not consistent: especially when "cmd-shift-<" and other common items are not there: makes you think you have seen all that is on offer.
Yes, that's exactly why I couldn't find it and had to ask here for help. It's a very confusing placement of the command.
Trevor