[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 155740] Support distinction rather than override of conflicting subdocument styles

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155740

Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz1 at gmx.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|NOTABUG                     |---
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED

--- Comment #7 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz1 at gmx.com> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #6)
> Definitely not a bug

I explicitly said in comment #0 that this is not a bug - it's an enhancement
request.

> and a WONTFIX.

It is impolite to mark an issue WONTFIX based on UX considerations when you're
not, say, Heiko, without first waiting for a reply to your claim. If you had
made a development consideration (e.g. "impelementing this introduces
exponential time complexity for rendering") - then maybe it would be
legitimate. Or if the reporter were a known crank. etc.

> The most important idea behind the master documents is exactly being able to
> centrally configure styles.

1. That is not the most important idea. The most important idea is having a
document composed of individual, existing documents "by reference" rather than
"by value", i.e. not by concatenating copies of the existing documents.

2. "Centrally configure" does not necessarily being with "delete non-central
configurations".

> The premise that styles in sub-documents are
> "discarded" is wrong, and they are "overridden" *temporarily*, i.e. when you
> open a sub-document by itself, they will keep the original properties.

They are discarded in the context of the larger document. And I explained and
gave an example of when the user may want them kept rather than discarded.

> Among
> other things, this allows a kind of "css", when different master documents
> override same styles in different ways.

I never said the user _never_ wants to override sub-document styles. I'm saying
the user _sometimes_ wants to override, and sometimes - to keep. 

> If one wants some distinction in their *part* of a multi=part document, they
> need to create new styles (or use ad-hoc formatting, if it's a single-use
> case).

No, they don't. They created a self-contained, perfectly valid document - as
well they should have. In fact, they probably need to _not_ create new
artificial styles; documents should definitely use styles with the common names
(e.g. Footnote, Emphasis, Internet Link etc. etc.)

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