I haven't been closely following the details of the discussion on fonts, arrows vs >, highlighting (italics, bold, etc), but I have some concerns to note.
IMO the criterion should be: do the differences add GENUINE VALUE for the user, so the changes are genuinely worth the time it takes for writers/editors/reviewers to apply, check that they are applied correctly, etc. "It looks good in PDF/print" is not, IMO, sufficient reason for doing things, though it should be a positive side-effect. "Keep it simple" has a lot to recommend it. 1) Time is saved in production, consistency of presentation is improved, and writers can concentrate on content instead of appearance (applying character styles). 2) Clean files can be output to a variety of media, including (but not limited to) PDF, print, ePub, HTML, DAISY (Digital Accessible Information System) talking books, braille. WE may not provide all those outputs, but others may wish to use our files as source documents for them. Hal -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
