[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Re: [office-comment] Re: my comments on the numbering spec proposal discussed by David F. andFlorian R.
On Monday 11 December 2006 17:22, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote: > Hi, > > The original ODF list concept is that we have <text:list> elements in the content, and a > list style. Each list has its own numbering. That is, if I have two <text:list> elements > they both start with 1. This seems sensible. Note that it contradicts Oliver's interpretation ("If you want to use the same list style for two separate lists, then you have to define for the second list, that the numbering has to restart.") > When using <text:list> elements the list styles only specifies the > layout of the list. The lists themselves are identified by <text:list> elements, but not > by the style name. > The only problem we have is that we cannot change the style within a > list. The style:overwrite attribute that has been proposed would solve this. ... so you would agree with the style:overwrite attribute being a text:list-item attribute rather than text:list attribute, right? Otherwise you need two <text:list>s to change the style and this breaks the structure. E.g. my 1/2/3/A/B example should be modelled as only one text:list, not two. Another example would be differently-numbered subsections, like: 1. 1.1. 1.2. 2. 2.A) 2.B) In this example it really is just one list, otherwise the numbering will end up being wrong. This example also shows why we (koffice) dislike the "define 10 levels in one list style". Not all items in this list use the same style. style-override at the item level solves this indeed, although it requires that one style is the "normal" one and the other one is the "override" With text:numbered-paragraph and one level per list style, the above would simply 6 numbered paragraphs pointing to whichever style they want to use. ==== To be fair, if OOo is supposed to be implement text:list correctly, then I'm still very confused by the semantics. For instance if I increase the level (e.g. using the tab key) I get two paragraphs with the same number, see attached document. For 4 paragraphs of depths of 1/1/2/2, I would expect to get A/B/a/b or A/B/1/2 or A/B/<nothing>/<nothing> or A/B/A/B if the same style is defined for level 2, but certainly not A/B/B/C !? Why does ODF define 10 levels in one style, while even the OOo GUI doesn't do that? "Numbering 4" is "A) B) C) D)", but doesn't say anything about what happens at level 2 and below. Not that I would want it to :) But then I would assume that A) B) is used at level 2 as well, unless I select another numbering style for those paragraphs. > We later introduced <text:numbered-paragraph> elements. The problem we face here is that > we don't have a <text:list> element, and therefore no way to decide to which list (or > numbering) they belong. One option would be to define that they all belong to the same > numbering, and to add an attribute that starts the numbering at a certain paragraph. Other > options are to re-use the list-style, or to use list-ids. I don't have a clear opinion > what is the best solution, but I think it is a different issue than the one for the list > elements, and we should discuss it independent of it. I agree, that the issue is different and should be solved independently. "All belong to the same numbering" is actually more or less what we do in koffice. For any numbered paragraph, we go up and find other numbered paragraphs of the same level to find out what this paragraph's number is; and any upper-level (or outline) paragraph stops the search. However the notion of a list-id for a bit more structure sounds nice, and from what I recall, MSWord lists also have the equivalent of a list-id, this is where this idea mostly comes from. -- David Faure, email@example.com, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).