https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138380
Buovjaga <ilmari.lauhakan...@libreoffice.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|1 |0
CC| |libreoffice-ux-advise@lists
| |.freedesktop.org
Keywords| |needsUXEval
Status|NEEDINFO |UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #28 from Buovjaga <ilmari.lauhakan...@libreoffice.org> ---
(In reply to Hans-Werner from comment #15)
> C o r e f e a t u r e ?
>
> [1] The Basic IDE is part of the core and therefore the Basic IDE printing
> feature [File]>[Print] is part of the core too. Isn't it ?
>
> [2] The Basic IDE printing feature seems to be a little bit old-fashioned,
> only black-and-white printing is possible contrary to the colorized basic
> macro code displayed by the Basic IDE. There's no "What You See Is What You
> Get" ...
>
> [3] Why not to replace the printing feature by an export-to-writer feature ?
> Colorizing basic macro code outside LO in the same way as is displayed by
> the Basic IDE is complex, difficult and error-prone. What's about to use
> directly or indirectly the already existing code colorizer of the Basic-IDE.
> For example, could it be possible to code some software that exports the
> displayed basic macro code in a writer document and replaces the
> SCREEN-color-tags by WRITER-color tags ?
>
> [4] The language of the descriptions of the (most) extensions is English.
> What's about LO users, that don't speak English ? If [3] could be realized,
> the language would be automatically the language of the LO version the user
> is using.
Let's ask UX team
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
