https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160686
Cor Nouws <c...@nouenoff.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #27 from Cor Nouws <c...@nouenoff.nl> ---
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #26)
> (In reply to Cor Nouws from comment #25)
> > If you don't even notice that people describe use cases, how can we then
> > help?
>
> My point is, that when one actually spells out a supposed use case for these
speaking of a 'supposed use case' looks like a nasty habit of making other
people's experiences ridiculous or fake.
I strongly object that behavior.
> styles - either the use case is reasonable/common, but then - the pair of
> styles don't fit the use case on a closer inspection; or the use case is
> convoluted and contrived, in which case it does not merit to have a pair of
> styles pre-defined for it.
I can't help that for you the altering of left and right pages is not a clear
use case. But it is. And the option (offered in the UI) to insert blank pages
on print/expert, is just an extra support to get the desired result.
Looking at a simple constructed 3 page document to 'prove' that it is weird, is
not a serious use case.
> With David's use case, it has been the second option: As we examined the
> behavior of the two page styles, and David verified that this behavior is
> his use case (well, I'll take him at his word anyway) - it became clear it
> is a niche and rather weird use case, with inconsistently-styled blank-page
> inserts, sometimes without the user having requested them.
David showed that it works as designed. You make that ridiculous by creating a
green border on one special page and complaining that inserted blank pages are
missing header/footer information - which to me is just expected.
> The contrivance is more obvious when one considers RTL documents, or
> documents which are partly RTL and partly LTR, where some simplifying
> assumptions cannot be made. Realizing this fact made Regina and Heiko
> suggest "salvaging" this pair of styles as "odd" and "even" - but here too:
> If one spells out that use case fully, one reaches the same dichotomy.
So the only issue that there seems to be, but it is one that I cannot oversee -
is that it (maybe) not serves the RTL use case.
Please do make a clear report with examples that also people not used to RTL
can understand.
Thanks,
Cor
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
