Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2015 Archives by date, by thread · List index


2015-02-10 17:29 GMT+01:00 Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com>:
On 10.02.2015 15:12, Zolnai Tamás wrote:

Second thing, I compared these three kind of character backgrounds and
found that LO's character
background is closer to MS shading attribute then to MS highlighting, because:
- LO's background color is a general attribute for different objects
like text range, paragraph, frame, page, cell and so on, and character
background is a specialization of it (like shading).
- LO's background color and MS shading both has more color to choose
from, while MS highlighting allows only 16 colors.
- LO's background color and MS shading has a meaning like "fill the
selected object's background with a color", while highlight has the
meaning like "highlight a text range with a highlighter pen".
So IMHO LO background color should be exported as shading to MS file
formats and not as highlighting.

Only similarity between LO's background color and MS highlighting is
the "Highlighting" toolbar button and this is the
problem here. Why LO uses an other name for character background on
the toolbar and why not use exactly the same
name (e.g. as in the menu)? This causes the misconceptions we have here.

i agree that having 2 different ways to do almost but not exactly the
same thing in the UI is confusing.

So my new plan is:
- Remove "Highlighting" toolbar button
- Replace it with the existing "Background color" toolbar button (set
it as default)
- Extend the functionality of this "Background color" button to be
able to set character background too (By now it is used for setting
paragraph, frame and cell background)

With that the toolbar icon of LO's character background will be
similar to that which is used in Word for setting MS shading attribute
(a paintbucket). This also means we don't need to support highlighting
in LO to solve this interoperability problem.

With respect to RES_CHRATR_HIGHLIGHT attribute it's still useful to
store MS highlighting on a separate attribute so an MS file won't
loose shading/highlighting information during a round trip. We can
solve that on a transparent way, so the users won't know that we have
two kind of character backgrounds behind the scenes.

actually - why do we need 2 core attributes for this?  if you apply both
"highlight" and "shading" in Word, one should override the other
completely in the document view, or how does it work?  can't we just in
the import filter convert both to the same core item, and if both apply
to the same text range, then only apply the "higher priority" one?  then
export it again as the attribute that allows more colors :)

In Word when both shading and highlighting is set to the same text
range, then highlighting covers shading, but
when highlighting is removed later then the shading "under" the
highlighting becomes visible. I can imagine this like
shading is a static part of the document while highlighting is set
temporarily (similar to the comments highlighting).

Other difference between these two attributes in Word is that shading
has effect on automatic font color (automatic
font color is a feature of MS Word which makes the actual font color
changing according to the background color, dark/light background ->
white/black font color), but highlighting has no such interaction with
it. So using only one background
attribute and so convert both shading and highlighting into one
attribute (shading or highlighting) during a round trip can
lead also to font color change (opening in Word).

So I think it's a good idea to handle both attribute separately.

Best Regards,
Tamás

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.