https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149018
--- Comment #18 from Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> --- (In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #17) > As I understand, the ”E” in OLE stands for ”Embedded” – so contradictions > abound before we even get started. I do not understand the "so contradictions abound before we even get started" - please describe what you mean. OLE means exactly Object Linking and Embedding; regardless of the copyright on the term, it says explicitly that the object that would use that name may be *either* linked *or* embedded, so both cases are possible. It does not contradict anything, it just does not prescribe which option is used in a specific case. > You write as though you have some insight into this small (?) group of users > who link OLE objects, as opposed to simply embedding OLE objects, which > seems to be the "default" (most common case?) in the Insert > Ole Object > dialog I used that much when I worked in a previous job. I have no numbers, so I am in no position to discuss how small the group is (my gut feeling is that it's quite large, but I will not insist - but note that data loss potential - even if it's just because of a term that is misleading - is not something that we may deem OK just because the number of affected is small); the search for "embed link" on Ask [1] suggest that there are real uses of that. > Do you really think such users would be ”tricked” by the word ”Embedded”, > when they had to explicitly click ”link to file” to get this kind of > embedding, and where there is documentation about this option (which I am > happy to improve if you think it is inadequate). The feature is rather advanced. And you need to consider different scenarios. You may forget how you created the file a year ago, when you need more space today; you may use a file created by your colleague in a shared environment... > Would it be better to leave OLE-Object as a ”separate” (special) case, just > as Image and Frame, where each gets their own dialog and toolbar title, and > appears at the top level of the menu (i.e., not in a category, such as > "Object" or Embedded Object")? (either way is fine with me) No. And as said, I can't suggest the better name. My current proposal is to follow your *original* idea, and use OLE everywhere where we need to disambiguate such objects from images or the like, and keep the "MS OLE vs our wrongly-named OLE" for a future. [1] https://ask.libreoffice.org/search?q=embed%20link -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
