Thanks for all the feedback. > On Sep 28, 2026, at 14:40, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Sept 2026 at 21:10, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Sep 28, 2026, at 12:36 PM, Craig Russell <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Dave, >>> >>>> On Sep 20, 2026, at 16:55, Craig Russell <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Dave, >>>> >>>>> On Sep 20, 2026, at 08:21, Dave Fisher <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Craig, >>>>> >>>>> A top post sorry. 'sokay >>>>> >>>>> (1) I would adjust the positioning of the form fields in the ODT to the >>>>> left. >>>> >>>> Not sure what you mean, The form fields are already just a quarter inch to >>>> the right of the field that describes them. >>> >>> I'm still looking for what you mean by 'adjust the positioning of the form >>> fields'. >>> >>> Can you please be more specific? >> >> Yes the fields should be better aligned to the left edge of the _____
I see what you mean now. The entry fields can be schrooched a bit to the left to better align with the _____ > > Do you mean the field names should be right-aligned? > Or do you mean the ___ should be extended towards the names? > Or do you mean the left edges of the ___ field markers should be > vertically aligned? > > If the form is to be changed, I think the family name check box should > be removed. > It does not serve any useful purpose, as the setting is ignored if the > secretary does not think it is correct. If both names could be family names, and there is nothing else to suggest which name is the family name, the check box is definitive. So that is the reason to keep it. I suppose there could be better documentation for the next document filer about how to figure out what the family name really is. But the short answer probably is to take the submitter's advice on what the family name is. I can also ask some of my Chinese friends for advice. Maybe some Chinese words on the form would be more helpful. > > A meta question: why is this thread on dev@whimsy? > It has very little to do with Whimsy; indeed it existed long before > Whimsy was created, and is likely to continue once the Whimsy > Secretary function is taken over by Tooling. You are right. But I thought I would get good feedback from this channel. Others not so constructive... Craig > >> Best, >> Dave >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Craig >>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Craig L Russell >>> [email protected] >>> >> Craig L Russell [email protected]
