On 2017-08-10 7:14, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 07:08:16 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Robert Funnell <robert.funn...@mcgill.ca> wrote:

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, Stephen Nichols wrote:

> Let me clarify. The “codes” revealed are not what your thinking of — tags with bracketed text, XML code, etc.. I think that the viewing option should more properly be called “Reveal Structure” since it simply shows what formatting instruction has been given and where, specifically things like, typeface and size, indentations, line spacing, etc..

You're right that what is wanted is not an exact display of the actual internal coding but rather some visual indication of what's going on.

To me the value of RevealCodes in WordPerfect was not just in seeing
the structure but in therefore being able to position the cursor
before or after (or inside or outside of) a particular style. This
would be just as useful in OO and LO.

- Robert

If one turns on /Format /Styles and Formatting, it clearly indicates
the current formatting style at the cursor position.

/View /Non printing characters is helpful in showing spacing and
paragraph/line ends.


I tested the reveal codes macro years ago. last time I tried it, I had to make changes to the underlying code to make it work. I don't remember exactly what it showed, or, how it showed it. Also, it did not entirely work as the system worked in WP, not that I entirely remember how that worked, but, here are some issues with reveal codes in LO / AOO.

The first issue is related to styles. So, if you want to know why your text is bold, it may be because there is a style making it so and it may be because someone applied direct formatting. So, coming out of the gate, there is always the question of what does one show with reveal codes? Do you show the styles or just the formatting? For sure this is useful functionality.

I don't even remember exactly what WP did. Could I start "BOLD" and then not turn it off? This is not possible the way that AOO is written.

I think that the bottom line is that "sure, it would be great", it is possible to do, the created extension provides (does it still work?) some approximation, the developers have not yet considered it sufficiently interesting to work on it (and I think it would require significant time to integrate it).

I think that the best path forward would be to open a feature request and then if sufficient people vote for it or express interest, it might be done.

Andrew Pitonyak


Reply via email to