[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 130719] Overwriting Writer styles does not overwrite changes to Marginalia paragraph style

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=130719

--- Comment #29 from sdc.blanco at youmail.dk ---
@Mike, I am grateful for your willingness to help me overcome my handicap of
not understanding what is going on here, which of course is also the point of
OP -- to give a clear "note" about what is going on...

>From your answers, it seems that I am close, but the "showstopper" is
inadequate grasp of the "built-in program defaults" and their consequences in
"overwrite".

So ... continuing....by concentrating on your latest formulation.

> There should no difference between template and normal document IIUC. 
Until I hear otherwise, I will work with this ‟fact.” 

This fact implies no need for separate sentences for ‟document” and ‟template”.

> I don't think that word "limited" is correct in your sentence 
> "only a limited subset of common styles and/or styles modified 
> from a default will be loaded". Limited by what or whom? 
Might be my misunderstanding. I had interpreted the discussion in relation to
comment 3 to mean that the (limited) list of styles named there would be loaded
and ‟overwrite”. (That is what motivated the file1/file2 experiment.) But I
have apparently misunderstood that discussion.  I had assumed that list of
styles in comment 3 were always loaded (i.e., "limited set of a default"),
whether modified and not, and therefore "overwriting". 

> It's naturally limited by the list of styles explicitly present 
> in the source file, 
Yes.  Covered by mention of ‟applied” and ‟modified” styles.

> but "limited" in your sentence doesn't sound like referring to 
> that natural limit (which doesn't need that qualification). 
Agree:  so-called ‟natural limit” does not need qualification.
Confirm: ‟limited” was meant to refer to something else, what you
called ‟the defaults built in the program”  (– but it appears that 
I have not grasped this adequately yet).

> Then, "a" in "a default" - we actually are talking about *the* default 
> in the program, not "a" default in unknown place. 
Ok.  I was uncertain here.  For example, in 7.1, there is a ‟Simple” template
and a ‟Default” template. (When I open a document with ‟Simple”, then only
about 10 Styles are loaded). But in this case, maybe no need to refer to
‟default template” at all (given: (a) different templates available and (b)
initial point that no difference between ‟template” and ‟document”).

> And this makes it necessary to keep clear distinction between *the defaults
> built in the program* (*not* related to *any* template), and *a template* 
> (just another kind of document which may contain arbitrary definitions of 
> some styles).
I’m trying. (-:  This seems to be where my understanding is inadequate. And
also seems to be the only point that is not under control yet. If I could
understand ‟the defaults” and their consequences/implications in the overwrite
situation, then I should be able to find a way to express it clearly (with the
other points).  

> The overwriting applies to the cases when both source and destination 
> contains a style with the same name. Any kind of style - from the 
> categories checked in the dialog.
Understood about overwrite.  My query was more general, but will return to this
later (if necessary), after I understand the ‟default” issue.

-- 
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/20201108/ec97ebe2/attachment.htm>