Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2016 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 10/02/16 10:53 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 2/10/16 4:27 PM, Gary Dale wrote:
On 10/02/16 12:01 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 2/10/16 8:28 AM, Gary Dale wrote:
On 09/02/16 11:39 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 2/9/16 2:23 PM, Gary Dale wrote:
On 09/02/16 03:23 PM, Dave Liesse wrote:


PDF is a great way to exchange documents but it has an interesting print
option (usually) of shrinking to fit the printer margins. If you send a
PDF label set, you need to remind the recipient to print them full size.
I've run into this problem several times where my carefully crafted PDFs
aren't printed the way I designed them.

In this case, IMO, the creator of the PDF should be aware of the potential margin issue and set them accordingly. So far, I've never been burned that I know of by using .5" margins except with the top margin of the 8167 labels.

So there should be no need for shrink to fit unless we are talking a totally different page size.

But it's awful hard to break people's mindset and get them to switch to PDF. "Oh, if we are going to share and work with the same thing, we both have to have MS Word." Or WordPerfect. Or Lotus' word processor in the old days, I can't remember the name. At one time, this was absolutely true. But it's no longer a mandatory thing with PDF on the scene.

There will be situations where where Word, or Excel, or ???????? will be required. But it's because that software is already in use across the enterprise. It's not because it's the only software that will do the job.

That's not the issue. Sometimes you want something to occupy the full page for professional printing but people use their home printers instead.

As for using the same software, that doesn't solve problems if the person doesn't have the same fonts installed that you do. The PDF format removes the requirement to stick to common fonts.

Similarly the ISO standard Open Document formats that LibreOffice uses allow documents to used by other programs, including the M$ ones. They may not look the same, but will at least be exchangeable and editable.

There used to be a problem with multi-column labels but they seem to
have redone the label specification to correct that. When creating
labels, there is "Format" tab that lets you adjust the label
In its new incarnation, it is easy to use and gives you exactly
what you
need to adjust the properties of incorrectly specified common label
formats down to 1/100 of an inch.

In the end, I'll probably do this.

You can specify the top margin, label height and vertical pitch (the
last two may be different if there is space between the labels) and do
the same for the left margin, label width and horizontal pitch. They
also allow you to specify the page size and the number of rows and

If you think a label isn't defined correctly, fix it. Also, file a bug report so that the developers can fix it for everyone. It's better to
light a candle or two than to curse the darkness.

In this case, the label spec is correct.  Font design will have to
have a factor in this someway too, I suspect.

It shouldn't unless LO calculates the position of the next label
relative to the end of the previous text. It would seem more natural
(and simpler) to calculate in absolute terms.

Upon retrospect, I agree.  But it is something you have to be
cognizant of when designing the label, as it can affect the apparent
vertical centering of text on the label.  Which can effect what you
think may be happening with label output.  In my case, the label
includes a graphic, which is unaffected by text positioning. Makes it
easy to figure out where the problem is likely to be.

Another overall negative effect of this problem is, you have to ask
yourself, if this is broken, what else in the suite is broken?
Especially if you are using LO to make a living.  Is there another
feature I use in Writer that doesn't work correctly?  What if one or
two functions in the spreadsheet calculate incorrectly?  What if Base
occasionally mangles your data?

I remember years ago when Intel turned out a chip that had an error in
it's math calculations.  It was a rare happening, but when they
finally admitted it publicly, trying to say it wasn't important do to
the rare occurrence, it did not go over well at all! <G>

I've yet to find software that is perfect (except of course for what I
develop  ;)  ).  Big suites like LO will have the occasional bug but
I've never found one that was more than an annoyance.

It's an annoyance if you can find a workaround. It's a problem if there's no workaround, and it's something you need to get your job done.

And, if it was something I produced, I won't be happy until it's fixed. "Close enough" just doesn't work for me in a lot of cases.

You did find a workaround though. As for perfection, the universe wouldn't exist if there was such a thing.

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.