Create Type for Inclusions+discussion
Hmm, found another case where you might expect a type:X in inclusion syntax to have an effect.
The case is a *structure rule, eg http://gerry.wagn.org/Scale+*type+*structure which contains {{+field|type:Field}}. That one seems less of an edge case than the main case in this ticket.
Feel free to assign tickets like this that I report for me to find a code fix. I don't want to fix anything you don't consider broken, but it it is a low priority ...
Update: this new case only seems to be broken for a user declared type (Field, recently created if that matters, vs. Phrase later in the *structure rule.
D'oh, maybe it is working, it just shows as a basic type because the new type doesn't have any rules that would change that.
We aren't able to nest multi-edits, are we. Now I want to see what happens.