https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160442
V Stuart Foote <vsfo...@libreoffice.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugs.documentfounda
| |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95
| |861
CC| |libreoffice-ux-advise@lists
| |.freedesktop.org,
| |vsfo...@libreoffice.org
Keywords| |needsUXEval
--- Comment #1 from V Stuart Foote <vsfo...@libreoffice.org> ---
We are bound by what ODF framework supports, all other styling schemas need
filter based translation--import and export (and why our CSS is not native and
integration of HTML5/CSS3 is missing, see also bug 95861).
Template ODF documents (nothing to do with the Master document .ODM) is much
more efficient to store and exchange style details. Trivial to describe
minimalistic ODF archives (especially with ODF Flat XML) as containers of
styled paragraphs, tables, page layouts that can be applied to new documents or
pasted as new elements on an existing document (opened in any of the
LibreOffice moduels, not just Writer).
So, beside improving the import/export *filters* for HTML5 and CSS (2.1 or 3)
and a browser like "Web" viewing of that rendering, how much advantage is
there really to implementing something more than current ODF template documents
to hold applicable ODF styling?
Not seeing a need to split out handling of our ODF 1.3 compliant styling--too
much dev work for something that would be alien to all external "style"
implementations, W3C CSS or other. Template archives are enough.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
