https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90068
--- Comment #7 from Christopher R Lee <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Jean-Francois Nifenecker from comment #6) > I completely support Regina's comments: a style name should never convey a > formatting setting name ("bold", "20pt"), but the intend of use for the > style. So, the 'emphasis' and 'strong emphasis' are correctly named, IMO, > just like 'quotation' is, etc. > I agree that some names are not immediately clear to newcomers. They just > have to learn. In my young years, I had to learn to read and to write. Then > I had to learn about text processing and styles. Styles are not intuitive, > they are computing matter and this has to be learnt (and tought) as well. I > strongly think the tool can't replace a teacher. Never. The italic font variant is used for other purposes than to provide emphasis. See for example http://html5doctor.com/i-b-em-strong-element/. It needs to be available without prejudice to or confusion with the intended meaning of the emphasis style. As others have mentioned, other font variants are in the same situation; I don't think the user should have to create appropriate styles. I don't know if a workaround would be to rename generic uncommitted built-in styles, so the user can take advantage of the variants of the particular font(s) in use. Note that in standard typographical practice, 'emphasis' may give italic in a passage in roman, and roman in a passage in italic; it's a switch. See for example https://fr.sharelatex.com/learn/Bold,_italics_and_underlining. In LaTeX you can obtain this effect by using *both* \textit and \emph; items like figure legends are already in italic so you just use \emph. It seems that the <i> element is beginning to be deprecated in html, with a recommendation to use classes to indicate the intended meaning. The present correspondence may draw attention to a related though presentational difficuly with LO. In my opinion, the tabbed windows way of presenting LO styles is an obstacle both in general and in the present context. A CSS lookalike would be better and (though not relevant here) it would show the cascading. Alternatively built-in fonts (at least) could be presented in a tabular format, so the user can see at a glance how all relevant style names are linked to variants of the font being used, with a warning if a variant is being generated artificially. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
