Andrew Brown wrote:
Rod Engelsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:e09ug3$dhm$1
@sea.gmane.org:
The other major deficiency in Writer's styles is the inability to affect
a relative change, a change in one attribute without affecting anything
else. So if you have a document that uses more than one font, you have
make duplicates of things like an Emphasis character style for each font
or point size. That's a big reason why people use direct formatting
rather than character styles; character styles often do /too/ much.
Didn't we work out a way, on this list some time, of doing this by a macro?
Not perfect, but a workaround that is useful if you need it.
What would the macro do? Create a new hierarchal sub-style on the fly?
Otherwise, you may as well just do direct formatting and forget about
the styles thing.
The basic problem lies in the nature of hierarchal structures. To get
this away from styles for the moment, consider a household budget. How
do you categorize health and automobile insurance? Are they insurance
expenses or do you stick the auto insurance under auto expenses and the
health under health expenses? If the latter, where do you put life
insurance? In this case the answer depends on what gives you the most
useful information.
Getting back to styles again, as someone else pointed out, styles are
about logical mark-up. Is a passage of text in German any different
because it's in 12-point TNR rather than 10-point Arial? Then why do I
need two different styles for that? Does the logical concept of emphasis
change depending on the font?
I hope Naomi's suggestion works. I went to bed after reading her post
and haven't actually tried it yet.
--
Rod
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
