[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 127279] Register-true with better labelling

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127279

--- Comment #10 from pedro.silva <pedro.silva at collabora.com> ---
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #9)
[...]
> Actually rather than "reference" (a paragraph style applied against the
> page) the concept would be "registration"--now common in alignment of offset
> press CMYK and half-tone image print work. But here it predates that
> considerably coming from the folding of large folio paper sizes to impose
> the signatures with correct sequence and alignment (front to back and across
> pages) -- when accomplished the printing and binding is "register-true" and
> "folded with the print".
> 
> But we have little support for imposing and printing 'folio, quarto, octavo,
> duodecimo, sextodecimo' layouts. Just look at the Print dialog's pages per
> sheet and order where we can not impose a multi-page print layout that would
> correctly _fold_. That and a lack of means to provide bleeds, trim, and
> registration marks means we can't directly perform DTP--and "register-true"
> while correct is not really appropriate.

Thanks Stuart for all the context, to me, this is gold! I really appreciate the
context and to know the reasoning behind.

> What we are able to do well is provide correct page to page registration of
> textual content. As our pages are composed dynamically when paragraphs are
> rendered the printing on pages will not register--page to page, column to
> column. But when we enable "register-true" on page styles, and allow
> individual paragraphs to pick up the alignment from the selected reference
> paragraph's line height (its font height, internal leading, external
> leading) as a baseline the documents textual content will register as if
> "imposed" correctly and then "folded with the print", trimmed, and bound.
> 
> So, while "register-true" is a correct label--agree its etymology is obscure
> and is really not helpful UX--but the action is still registration.

I agree with you, maybe having such a term based of print world without any
relation with existent LO terminology might not be the clearest.

> Rather than Reference, I would suggest:
> 
> Register line spacing / Reference style

In my opinion this is already better when compared with the current labelling.
However I'm having a hard time with "Register" or "Registration" because
somehow the following doesn't let me stop worrying about UX:

- Register is better than the Register-true (because the latter is kinda of a
state/adjective) but this term is based on printing but Document/page and its
overall line spacing (leading, Baseline grid, vertical motion etc...) are not
exclusive of print specially in this day and age.
- Users that know nothing about printing and don't own a printer they might be
quite confused with it.
- Register often times called registration is also quite an uneasy term (to me,
in this case) since there are other elements sharing the same name (e.g.:
registration marks)
- Also a document can be on purpose misregistered (out of) for artistic
purposes etc..

And in Reference style I think it would be still quite valuable to have in
there the word "Paragraph" as it helps to connect the dots and invites the user
to explore the Paragraph style dialogue etc.

Hm... I honestly think this is a great discussion and as I stated these (what
you suggested) would be already better then what we have now but I would still
use 

Page dialogue
- Referenced line spacing / Paragraph style:

"Reference" here would play quite well also in the paragraph dialogue

Paragraph dialogue
- Referenced line spacing / Activate

hm...but then again I understand your reasoning and maybe it would be good to
leave some sort of trace for the user that already use and know the feature and
all its context. And if so, then your proposal could be also a good option.

(goes away and expects no sleeping tonight on the accounts of thinking about
this :p )

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.