Hi Khaled,
On Friday, 2011-09-02 18:21:50 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
MSWord is not known for its sane handling of font metrics, and I have
been told recent (2007-) broke it even further.
Hum, ending up with .docs, .docxs, .rtfs that layout even further from
their original
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 06:39:52PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Khaled,
On Friday, 2011-09-02 18:21:50 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
MSWord is not known for its sane handling of font metrics, and I have
been told recent (2007-) broke it even further.
Hum, ending up with .docs,
On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 01:22 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 02:39:37PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
But before going there, I just need to make sure that we are on the same
page wrt keeping the new algorithm and moving on to fixing whatever
needs fixing.
I'm not sure
Hi Caolán,
On Monday, 2011-09-05 13:59:16 +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 01:22 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 02:39:37PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
But before going there, I just need to make sure that we are on the same
page wrt keeping the new
Hi Eike,
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Eike Rathke o...@erack.de wrote:
But based on what I'm seeing on this thread, I take that the new glyph
metric calculation algorithm is the correct way? If so, then we'll have
to make some adjustments to some of the size sensitive areas to bring
Hi Kohei,
On Monday, 2011-09-05 12:33:31 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Yes, that would indeed be needed. Probably also import/export from/to
Excel needs new row-height calculation, as they specify row height in
fractions of font height, IIRC.
Well, for the import of Excel binary
Hi Kohei,
On Friday, 2011-09-02 23:53:51 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
I guess the major fear isn't that your code is wrong, it's probably
right, it's what stuff relying on the old way of doing things will
change.
So, I was wondering why the default row height of a new Calc document
has
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 02:39:37PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
But before going there, I just need to make sure that we are on the same
page wrt keeping the new algorithm and moving on to fixing whatever
needs fixing.
I'm not sure we want to keep the new algorithm as default, given that
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:31:14AM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
It shouldn't be hard to adapt GetFontMetric implementation in
vcl/win/source/gdi/salgdi3.cxx to use the new function and have the same
logic as the unix code.
Here is a patch that, hopefully, does this, but I couldn't test it and
it
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 23:31 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:43:53PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 11:47 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
I just tested with a simple lorem ipsum document with Liberation Serif;
page count went down from 24 to 22 after
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 11:23:14AM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 23:31 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:43:53PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 11:47 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
I just tested with a simple lorem ipsum document
Hi guys,
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 10:03 +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
I guess the major fear isn't that your code is wrong, it's probably
right, it's what stuff relying on the old way of doing things will
change.
So, I was wondering why the default row height of a new Calc document
has suddenly
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 23:54 -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
The attached patch is an attempt to bring some sanity to the situation:
It seems that you have investigate this quite deeply and I would love
to commit and push your patch. However, I am a bit scared. Could
somebody else who actually
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 23:54 -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
The attached patch is an attempt to bring some sanity to the situation:
It seems that you have investigate this quite deeply and I would love
to commit and push your
Hi Tor,
On Wednesday, 2011-08-31 23:54:17 -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
The attached patch is an attempt to bring some sanity to the situation:
It seems that you have investigate this quite deeply and I would love
to commit and push your patch. However, I am a bit scared. Could
somebody
The changes themself look sane, regarding the background Khaled gave and
knowing part of his work from older days I didn't hesitate much to
commit this :)
OK, excellect! Khaled, if you want direct commit access, just ask (hmm, file a
bug asking for that, is that still the correct procedure?)
On Sep 1, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
The changes themself look sane, regarding the background Khaled gave and
knowing part of his work from older days I didn't hesitate much to
commit this :)
OK, excellect! Khaled, if you want direct commit access, just ask (hmm, file
a bug
Hi Caolán,
On Thursday, 2011-09-01 10:03:40 +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 23:54 -0600, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
The attached patch is an attempt to bring some sanity to the situation:
It seems that you have investigate this quite deeply and I would love
to commit and
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 02:43:53PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 11:47 +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
I just tested with a simple lorem ipsum document with Liberation Serif;
page count went down from 24 to 22 after applying the patch
Comparison with MSWord will be good to
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:12:28PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
This only done for 'unx' similar work is needed for 'win' and 'aqua',
but I'm not familiar with these platforms and can't test on it.
I wonder if this patch will then introduce significant rendering
differences between
The attached patch is an attempt to bring some sanity to the situation:
It seems that you have investigate this quite deeply and I would love to commit
and push your patch. However, I am a bit scared. Could somebody else who
actually understands the issues involved have a look?
This only
21 matches
Mail list logo
