[Libreoffice] [REVIEW] bug#36874 to be patched in 3.4.5 as well?

Winfried Donkers W.Donkers at dci-electronics.nl
Fri Dec 23 08:04:02 PST 2011

>Your code looks definitely better than the original one. Well, I am
>still not sure about the calculation. It makes perfect sense when I
>imagine the paper with blank labels. On the other hand,
>please look at http://download.go-oo.org/tmp/labels.png. 

I looked at a lot of (blank) labels and also came to the conclusion that the 
definition of the labels leaves room for interpretation.
My calculation is based on the assumption (presumption?) that the
page containing the labels is symmetrical, i.e. rotating the page
180 degrees is not a problem, left margine equals right margin and
top margin equals bottom margin.

It would be much better if the label-definitions contain all dimensions, i.e.
should include either right margin and bottom margin or the page size.
That was too great a change for me to commit without proper discussion.

>Have you tested your code with real label printing?
>Is just the visualization wrong in LO?
I have not looked at the visualisation/UI, but at the page size as shown in
format-page and at the printer behaviour (the printer at our office wants exact 
A4 definiton, otherwise it asks for custom paper sheets).

>PS: Just a nitpicking. I did not use the ?: operator in my example. I
>think that it was not ideal in this case because you cut&pasted the long
>calculation, so it was hard to read and prone to a typo ;-)

I'm the last to suggest my code is ideal or even close to ideal ;)

Should you wish further information (hacking ?), feel free to ask. Currently I am
wrestling with easyhack 34425, but should I get that right, I can have a go at further
improvements of labels.
For users, label printing is mostly troublesome, so any extra user-friendliness
of the application is a plus.


More information about the LibreOffice mailing list