https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=3959
--- Comment #311 from Keith Collyer <ke...@collyer.uk.net> --- (In reply to ther from comment #308) > (In reply to Keith Collyer from comment #305) > > Over on the LibreOffice wiki someone has created a page > > (https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/WikiAction/history/Outline_view) for > > specifying what an Outliner should do. Unfortunately, it doesn't actually > > have any real content right ow, but maybe that's a place it could be > > developed. > > > > Where it gets developed should be irrelevant; what's more important is that > a defined specification is made to enable the decision to proceed (or not). Indeed, I should add my suggestions to the specification. > > Notice neither Word nor OO has all these features. > > > > With respect, proper user specification is required, analogous to UML. If > features prove to be more powerful than m$, at last we would be seeing a > real desire for other word processors to be more than an m$-clone for those > that want free software without any need to change behaviour or to donate > towards _free_ development. Professionally I am a requirements engineer, and I can tell you that the last thing that most non-software developer users want is a specification in UML ;). Use Cases are a great way of understanding and structuring requirements, User Stories are in many ways better, but neither are requirements. Once we have an agreed (sub-)set of user requirements, then we can start creating the sort of detailed requirements developers need, and designing the solution. BTW, this can be done in an agile way by identifying the best value for least effort. > > away. In Navigator, you wouldn't even see it. This is also why suggestions > > to use a separate outliner miss the point. You use outlining not just to > > create the initial structure, but also to work with it afterwards. And > > suggestions to go back and forth between an outliner and word processor are > > equally silly for reasons thrashed to death above. > > > > The xml/dita/latex paradigm; write content once, write presentation/format > elsewhere. As such, what's wrong with multiple windows? Do one thing, well, > is the unix mindset... Separating writing content and creating presentation is fine, so long as you can move seamlessly between the two. And you have to remember the audience, most users of word processors want WYSIWYG, they haven't made the conceptual switch needed to separate content and presentation. In some cases they don't want to - and we should acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with that, if you can do things in one tool why learn two? In some cases, they don't even realise that there is a difference. Again, this is the market that OO is in, like it or not. I am personally happy with that separation, though even I would prefer to use Lyx over a plain text editor to crate LaTeX material - it really does help to see things like headings clearly indicated on the screen. As for the Unix mindset, that is a valid point, though it isn't a mindset that is acceptable to most word processor users. If OO is to be seen as a credible alternative to MS Office, it has to be acceptable to those who have grown up using MS. That is just reality. Refusing to see that means that OO will remain like Linux, in many ways better than the MS alternative, but never reaching mass appeal. > > As for Lyx / LaTeX, I would happily use them if I were producing documents > > just for myself. But I work with a large team and documents are produced > > collaboratively. Hell with be at absolute zero before they move away from > > standard word processors. We are supposed to all use OO, but most docs are > > still in Word. > > Change is painful, especially from those too old/profitable to change. > Disruptive, innovative technology, is by definition a major threat to the > status quo. Anyway, lyx/latex/subversion is a successful collaboration > environment: > https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Collaborative_Writing_of_LaTeX_Documents I didn't say it couldn't be done, I said it would not happen. And where I work is fairly typical of most organizations. Even the geeks and nerds among us aren't geeky or nerdy enough to go against the flow and make our lives unnecessarily difficult. Read my earlier comments, I used to write Lisp professionally in EMACS, you don't get much more nerdy than that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue. You are the assignee for the issue.
