In a message dated 2010.06.11 05:35 -0500, Uwe Fischer wrote:
[Numbering in brackets added to clarify reply]
Barbara Duprey wrote:
...
[1] You have a "family" of text documents, all related to the same
overall function.
[2] The documents are fully independent of each other for such things
as styles, page numbering, layout, and so on.
[3] When something causes you to want to edit or refer to one of these
documents, chances are high that your requirement extends also to
the other documents in the family.
[4] Currently, each of these documents has a different name, and you
open each in a separate window to achieve your objective.
[5] The proposal is to allow the documents to retain their
independence, but be contained in a single file that can be opened
with one action and makes the individual documents readily
accessible from each other to streamline the updating and/or
referencing activities you need to perform.
[6] When you have accomplished your task, you currently close each
document separately. With the new structure, a single action
closes all the documents.
Besides improving efficiency for the document owner, an advantage to
this structure is that [7] the recovery information tracks together
for all the documents, making it less likely that they will get out
of sync by being restored to different points in your workflow.
On 06/11/10 03:42, RA Brown wrote:
[8] I would like to see at least one other added: The ability to
have text and spreadsheets in the same file.
[9] Having the ability to store scanned and PDFs documents would be
an even bigger plus.
if you replace "file" with "folder", it looks like everything is
already there. ...
Uwe, that not quite true. Dotan can answer for his own proposal [and
has, I see], but the single folder does not address points [4]..[7] of
Barbara's summary, and of course does not [8]..[9] of Andy's add-on,
which go beyond Dotan's original suggestion.
Clearly these are enhancements, not bug issues. From an application
programmer's standpoint, you may think, 'That's system programming, for
OS functions,' but those lines get fuzzed all the time, for just such
functional considerations as described here. FWIW, I think a good case
has been made, and we will see this somewhere in the future; it's just a
question of whether OO will be the first.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
