[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 #15 from Luke Kendall <luke.kendall at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #13)
> (In reply to Luke Kendall from comment #11)
> 
> This is wrong. This is not converting a document into "using styles", it
> abuses styles to create a new set of DF - named "Simplify<N>".
> 
> Styles are not just a random set of attributes with a name. They are
> designed to introduce structure into documents. And that largely means using
> *semantics*, not formatting. Two *different* styles may perfectly happen to
> have the same set of attributes, still absolutely different semantical
> meaning. E.g., you may want your quotes in a text to be highlighted the same
> way as emphasis; yet, they have different meaning. DF cannot give you that
> semantical meaning - you would e.g. simply make both emphasized text, and
> quoted text, italicized and monospace. Then you would have hard time when
> you decide to make quoted text (but not emphasized text) different size.
> Styles, when used properly, give you that ability - and that they happen to
> have same formatting at a given moment, does not break your ability to
> differentiate them, or separately change their formatting at a later time.
> 
> Your "Simplify<N>" has absolutely nothing to do with the idea of using
> styles. So it's just another direct property of texts, not creating any
> structure, but implemented using style mechanism - still I repeat: they are
> *not* styles as they designed to be.

I completely disagree with you.

My reasoning is that I think you're claiming my proposed function could never
introduce new styles that have semantic meaning.

I completely reject that because it depends on the user's intent. In my case,
and I would argue many others, the visible style matches the semantic intent.

I am not trying to claim that such congruence is always true, just that it can
be.  Therefore a function that would produce such automatically-created styles
would be true styles, not DF+style, when used on documents for which that
congruence was true.  Note that it's a user choice.

Further, a document that had been "Simplified" would then require little work
to find text of a certain style and change it if that case had some special
semantics.  The effort of turning a document with a mess of DF into a well
structured document would be moderate, instead of a Herculean undertaking.

-- 
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/20200902/356060e7/attachment.htm>