FW: Smart-Art in Writer - Correct 'Import' approach ?
vmiklos at suse.cz
Tue Sep 3 05:21:49 PDT 2013
On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 05:35:12PM +0300, Adam Fyne <Adam.Fyne at cloudon.com> wrote:
> We are doing some work on implementing 'Smart-Art *Preservation*' in Writer.
> Meaning – if the user does WordèLOèWord round-trip we plan that they
> won't lose their Smart-Art object.
> Currently Smart-Art is being imported into *simple shapes* in Writer (which
> don't exactly look the same), and most of the actual data and binding
> between shapes is lost (not to mention it doesn't look the same).
> In order to preserve the original Smart-Art object – we would plan on
> loading the entire XML nodes and attributes of Smart-Art to property maps
> (e.g. Miklos's great 'InteropGrabBag').
This makes sense, yes.
> In addition, instead of showing to the user simple shapes (that he can
> currently edit and move around) –
> we would like to change this and show the user a *locked* bitmap of the
> smart-art, that the user cannot manipulate (so that he can at least
> preserve the original Smart-Art).
What is the benefit of this, from a user's point of view?
> Should we take a different approach that maybe pops a message when loading
> a DOCX with Smart-Art asking the user:
> *"We noticed you are importing a DOCX with Smart-Art. Would you like to
> preserve it and keep it un-editable or convert it to simple shapes ?"*
> And then act according to the user's choice? (choosing simple shapes will
> lose the 'Smart-Art' functionality, while choosing 'preserve' will not let
> the user edit the smart-art, only see it).
This is certainly possible, e.g. the ASCII filter asks for encoding
IIRC, the CSV import filter is also interactive, but one popup for every
smartart is probably a bit too much, imagine a presentation containing
100 smartart shapes. :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the LibreOffice