https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
--- Comment #38 from Heiko Tietze <tietze.he...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Christoph Schäfer from comment #37) > I can't see what's wrong with having two standard palettes hard-wired into > LibreOffice: You sacrifice consistency, transparency, and flexibility for having one static configuration. Consistency means similar functions behave the same. Palettes can be edited locally, delete, added, have the same naming scheme (i.e. lower case, whoever introduced that) etc. Transparency is not given to the user, she is not able to know why this particular palette behaves differently. And we also loose the flexibility to adjust things, perhaps beyond the layout (Stuart suggested, if I understand right, an internal layout with whitespaces to align the colors), e.g. renaming the palette. Assuming we get the enhanced extension manager, I blogged about recently, there should be not only an option to download palettes (or more general, objects) but also to delete them. People who do not do professional desktop publishing, guess >80%, will hardly use this palette and prefer either what their OS provides (Tango, Breeze, Windows/Azur, and MacOS/Capitain? - the latter are todos) or use the tonal swatch. And finally I care more about Libreoffice branding colors. Why not hard code these colors? <- This is not a question, at least not to me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise