On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 14:29 +0200, Niklas Nebel wrote: > Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > But, logically, it would make sense to store the ruby text together with > > the base text, because the ruby text is conceptually a property of the > > base text. Putting them together would also eliminate the > > synchronization problem because the ruby and the base texts would never > > be separate. > > Conceptually, it's a property of a part of the text, not the whole cell > content.
Yes. But since we don't differentiate partial texts from whole texts in terms of class representation (both are represented by OUString), my logic and yours have very little difference. :-) > > > So, overall, introducing a new class named ScRubyStringCell as a child > > class of ScStringCell, and making changes to the EditEngine class (in > > svx) seems to be the most attractive choice. But I wonder what the > > level of difficulty is for this approach. > > ScRubyStringCell would have to keep a list of character positions and > associated ruby text. The cleaner solution might be to always use > ScEditCell if ruby is present. > How many cells with ruby text will there > usually be in a spreadsheet anyway? If you're limiting to only those cells that display ruby texts, then the number may not be that high; however, even if the cells don't display the ruby texts within cell, they still need to store the ruby text information in case they are referenced in the PHONETIC function, copy-n-paste etc. So, that covers pretty much the majority of cell instances. Kohei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
