Hi Regina, all,did you mean we should have three entries: [New], [Child] and [Duplicate]? Would this "child style" not be just the same as "new style based on..."? Even if so, maybe your naming is clearer: I should know that the "child style" keeps a relation with the "parent style": the inheritance. This could be clearer and help distinguish between Child and Duplicate, since "new style based on..." doesn't imply, at least doesn't seem to imply the inheritance relation, so it would be just the same as "duplicate".
As for the naming scheme, Christoph, is it really that important? People usually change the default names: granted they know what they're doing, any name would fit. The thing is: people don't always know what they're doing regarding to styles, so what could we do to make it more transparent? With that in mind, I believe we should stress the inheritance logic in all ways we can: "My Style (duplicate) (n)" as default name for Duplicate, and "New (inherited from My Style) (n)" -- a modified form of your advanced proposal on that -- could be more suitable than just naming "Untitled" or "Unnamed" as it is today for new styles which get inheritance. The thing is: inheritance is permanent, so if you say "based on" one might think the parent style don't influence the child style anymore after creation. Maybe "New (Child of My Style) (n)" would be an even better aproach. That's what I think, but I didn't get quite well your rejection of "New (based on My Style) (n)" and what you meant by "flooding LibO with wrong information". Could you explain this a little further?
And about the style preview: do you think we need a preview of all styles at the same time? In MSOffice it is like that, but they can only show a handful of styles at once. I'm not sure if it's useful to preview all styles like that. We could though still have our list, and only preview the style that is selected on that list. It would still allow to compare to the current applied style -- which is already visible in the text itself.
Cheers./ Em 10-09-2011 12:49, Regina Henschel escreveu:
Hi Astron, Astron schrieb: [..]Okay, I'll try to specify this now: [New] # inherit from "default style" (user can change this later) # no new definitions (empty organiser, except for, as proposed above, the separators indicating inherited definitions) [Duplicate] # inherit from the same style the original style inherited from # copy all definitions from the original styleHow to make a chain? For example "text body" -> "list" -> "numbering 1" -> "numbering 1 End". I know how to make it, but how should the UI look, to make it easy and understandable to normal users? Your proposal does not solve the problem "I want a list, but the last list item needs a larger spacing to the next paragraph." Perhaps a third entry [child] is needed.Kind regards Regina