[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 135871] Highlighting no fill is not the same as no fill; there is still direct formatting present according to paragraph style

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135871

--- Comment #54 from Luke Kendall <luke.kendall at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #52)
> (In reply to Telesto from comment #50)
> 
> Oh.
> 
> I tried hard to explain the problem to Telesto. Tried to explain the idea
> behind the feature; its intended user base; who exactly is the model user.
> In the end, answering Telesto's request for simple steps, I wrote roughly
> this:
> 
> > See: here is a complex functionality, with involved mix of inheritance,
> > layers, dependencies, etc, which is very useful, but from Benjamin's PoV,
> > behaves almost randomly.
> > 
> >  =========> But here is the button created for Benjamin <=========
> > 
> > after pressing which, the function becomes simple for Benjamin, at the cost
> > of masking all the complex machinery beneath.
> > 
> > Now Telesto wants to break the behaviour of the button, in such a way that
> > using it results in another complex behaviour, potentially useful for some
> > power users, but still confusing for Benjamin.
> 
> I hoped that it's rather clear for anyone, that if there is a functionality
> is created for some user base, then breaking it exactly for that user base
> is a no-go.
> 
> Well, the reply is:
> 
> > Yes, it's correct; but I fail to see why you say that it's OK above the
> > "=========> But here is the button created for Benjamin <=========",
> > but having the same below the line is inappropriate...
> 
> Am I the one who, respectfully assuming due intelligence in the opponent,
> starts suspecting being trolled?

Who is this referring to?  

> I am done here, trying to "discuss" something with a troll and spammer, who
> floods Bugzilla with zillions of low-quality "reports" (unlike in the
> beginning); making one who sees "this bug authored by Telesto" to react like
> "ah, this is safe to skip".

I sure hope the above isn't referring to me?  I would be surprised if you were,
because I spend valuable time reporting bugs in the hope they're of some use.
But I can't work out the meaning of this:

> making one who sees "this bug authored by Telesto" to react like
> "ah, this is safe to skip".

(I honestly can't understand what it is saying.)

I've been lightly following the discussion, but they're hard to follow because
you're all using user role names which are unknown to me so I can only roughly
follow the discussion, and they also became long and very in-depth.

I have also been avoiding getting too involved in the discussion because I find
it very hard to find positive aspects in the existing logic and structure.

I'm glad my simple question helped crystallise some issues.
I'm surprised the ensuing discussion became so complex.
I'm worried and confused that Mike feels someone was trolling.
I'm hoping he doesn't think I'm trolling - I would be shocked if he did.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-bugs/attachments/20200922/20dc98a7/attachment-0001.htm>