https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135871
--- Comment #20 from Luke Kendall <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Telesto from comment #19)
> (In reply to Luke Kendall from comment #18)
[snip]
> But of course, the whole style stuff is rather 'hard'. Basic formatting at
> PS level (say font), some overlay at CS level (bold).. accompanied with DF
> (say highlighting). What should auto-style produce here.
I'm not sure I understand.
Do you mean, should the CS style (e.g. bold) be just a Bold style, or should it
be a style that copies all the properties of the PS and then adds Bold to that
and creates a PS, or is it just a CS style (e.g. StrongEmphasis, or
SimplifiedCharStyle2 or whatever) applied on top of the PS?
I think to try to keep the number of styles to a minimum, it probably means you
use the PS and just create a new CS.
Similarly for the section highlighted - should that be one of the above two
options, plus Highlight?
(I just realised I don't know if Highlight is a character attribute that could
be turned into a style, PS or CS...? I just tried, and couldn't find a way to
set a character style to do that. So I think it's saying, if you highlight,
that can only be done with DF.)
> However it seems that at we both agree that working with styles or
> converting DF to styles being Herculean undertaking once in a while. With
> the impression that this should be optimized/ streamlined somehow. And that
> the current implementation being sub optimal.
>
> What should be changed, how it should be changed and what's feasible
> different matter. I love to come at a understanding about what needs
> improving (or not); next a list of possible options..
>
> For the record I'm trying to burn down styles or the whole concept.
I'm guessing you meant to have "not trying" there.
> But
> should be working a little better next to DF. Sometimes I think is the whole
> half heated implementation created to force people not using DF if they use
> styles. And make life of people who end up with DF and styles for one reason
> or another pretty hard.
I empathise. I doubt it's true, but I understand what you mean.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
