Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: > Chad Smith wrote: >> I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You >> can actually see what it's called. >> >> The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you >> *do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without >> prompt to the user) and you want to see the actual filename, then you >> can't see what the filename is. >> >> -Chad Smith >> > > You're right, you can't see the file name. Oh wait, except for the URL > bar, or by going in a removing the title in the properties menu.
All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-) OOo is an editor and here it is obvious that the file name is more important than the title of a document. This and the fact that many Word documents have automatic titles the user is not aware of are good arguments for not showing the title by default. There might be certain use cases where showing the title can be the better choice. Automatically generated files, untitled documents (that better should be called "unnamed", right?) or forms come into my mind. So perhaps we can find a way to allow for both. You can watch the issue to see what happens. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
