On 9/24/06, Chong Yidong wrote: > By the way, the `linefield-example' command you provided assigns a > field with a `boundary' value. Such fields are treated specially; see > the docstring of `constrain-to-field'. Is this deliberate? it had to do with the special treatment that widget-field-at provides for fields named 'boundary. however, i think i no longer need that provision, so can use any field name. i see different behavior when i use an arbitrarily named field in my example. it's closer to what i need, as long as i don't put the cursor near the border between the fields or in the structure side, but there are still some problematic behaviors. i'm attaching a new version of the script which describes exactly what's going on. -- ken ken.manheimer@gmail.com http://myriadicity.net