Gary Schnabl wrote:
Deselecting colors (or most other things) via intelligent use of styles
for the relatively few hard copies of the docs could easily be handled
in the master documents used for the print docs. So, that is mostly a
non-issue with regard to online viewing.
As the producer of the print docs, I already do this.
However, in my note I was thinking of end-users printing from the
PDFs provided to them, not me/us as producers of the printed
copies. Apologies for not being clear about that.
If users are printing from ODT, even if they know they can change
colours in the styles (most won't know this), they won't know
which styles to change -- and even if they knew all this, they
certainly wouldn't want to be bothered.
If users are printing from PDF, they may or may not know that
they can change their settings in their PDF viewer and/or printer
setup, and again even if they can do it and know they can do it,
they probably won't want to be bothered.
Why make things more difficult for any users unless there is a
clear benefit (not just a non-problem) for the majority?
Janet Swisher summed up one of the other main issues much better
than I have:
This project has to balance usability for readers with simplicity
for volunteer authors and editors, in order to foster participation.
The more time authors and editors have to spend applying special
styles for special cases, the less time they spend focused on the
content, which is where the real value of docs is.
Gary said:
> Not everything non-vanilla is "eye candy."
Janet responded:
> True, but it needs to earn its keep.
Many thanks to Jonathon, who brought up some other very relevant
points that I had forgotten.
--Jean
