[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 122696] Page settings missing a few paper sizes

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122696

V Stuart Foote <vstuart.foote@utsa.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |99525
                 CC|                            |vstuart.foote@utsa.edu

--- Comment #7 from V Stuart Foote <vstuart.foote@utsa.edu> ---
Hmm, looking at the vast mix of standards based and extended paper
specifications [1] that could require internal LO support shows our current
droplist of 31 entries is really inadequate.

But then as currently positioned--LibreOffice project scope is really not in
the DTP arena. 

Especially since we can not produce proper Bleed and Printers marks [2], and
our VCL canvas layout is limited to what ODF can support. 

How relevant really are the majority of the larger paper sizes: 4A0, 2A0, A0,
A1 even A2; or the corresponding C or B series sizes in those ranges. Likewise
the larger DIN 476-1/476-2, SIS, JIS or American ANSI E, D, or C sizes? 

When even being able to print most requires access to large format plotter or
offset press--specialized equipment that is out of scope for our office
project!

In fact having no DTP capability for Bleeds, Slugs and Cut lines currently
eliminates _any_ utility to supporting the oversize "raw" ISO 217 RA & RSA page
sizes. The extra "raw" size intended only to be trimmed away.

The smaller sizes are equally questionable--most can not be handled in personal
or home office printers. Why would we support those page layout formats at the
expense of a cluttered UI?

So I agree there is room to fix content of the drop listing for reasonably
useful paper sizes--especially where we have gaps in localized support. And it
looks like some of the envelope sizes are suspect (e.g. ISO 269 is "withdrawn")
yet we list those envelop sizes available? M

But while LO continues to be lacking DTP support, project should not feel
obliged to support what are essentially "exotic" page sizes. The existing drop
list UI is functional. But if a dev is motivated to pick up Jonathan's rework
it looks feasible in general, but short of that nothing to be gained.

IMHO => WF

=-ref-=
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_size
[2] bug 76629, bug 93166, bug 103396, bug 103683


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99525
[Bug 99525] [META] Enhance Draw's DTP capabilities
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.