<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED INVALID - Numbered Lists Don't Work And Haven't For A Decade"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116506#c9">Comment # 9</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED INVALID - Numbered Lists Don't Work And Haven't For A Decade"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116506">bug 116506</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:kitchm@tutanota.com" title="kitchm@tutanota.com">kitchm@tutanota.com</a>
</span></b>
<pre>If we say that a person must use a particular font, then we must also say that
the program is not what we might expect from other word processors. And that
is fine, if that is the case. But user beware.
However, RTM does not help that since IMHO most users would expect to be able
to use the font the are most familiar with.
Would I be correct in assuming that you are a Writer insider? If so, your
viewpoint might be somewhat unable to fairly compare the end user's experience
when it comes to usability and intuitive design.
Further, the implication being put forth here is that the user must take
training time to learn a whole new word processor, either by class or my
reading. The promotion of Writer as a substitute for Word and WordPerfect
would therefore be misleading.
IMHO, we can't have it both ways.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>