Astron wrote: > While I can understand the intention of the bug, to me the proposed > solution sounds like bad English. I am also unsure if the change > proposed expresses the option properly (and if this option can be > explained properly in three words). > I think a better solution would be to keep "Create hybrid file", but > add an explanation two-liner like "Saves an ODF version of this > document inside the PDF, making the PDF easily editable in > %PRODUCTNAME." (Note that the original patch hard-coded the > application name!) > Hi Astron,
can you propose an alternative patch in the bug report? > I am also not too keen on the ".pdf" file extension being changed to > ".odf.pdf"—there will be enough users who still have the "hide known > file extensions" option of Windows on and thus will only see ".odf". > Additionally, two file extensions look awful. > I can't see any proposal in the bug you reference (though Jenei talks about adding it) - but I agree with your assessment. Besides that, the file is no proper ODF file (i.e. removing the .pdf extension and throwing it at other odf-processing applications will not work), so the name may not match user expectations. Cheers, -- Thorsten
pgppjYTZtvxlN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
