[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Re: [office-comment] Re: my =?utf-8?q?comments=09on=09the=09numbering_spec_proposal_discussed_by?==?utf-8?q?_David_F=2E?= =?utf-8?q?_andFlorian=09R=2E?=
On Monday 22 January 2007 15:29, Florian Reuter wrote: > Wow --- thats interresting. > > Let's assume the lists will restart, then I would expect: > 1. > 1.A. > A.i. > i.a. > > since: > LS1=< {"1"/1}, {"1"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … > > LS2=< {"1"/1}, {"A"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … > > LS3=< {"A"/1}, {"i"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … > > LS4=< {"i"/1}, {"a"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … > I agree. But this is exactly why I hate the fact that list styles define all 10 levels in one style. It just makes no sense. In order to get 1. 2.A. 3.ii. 4.c. I would like to be able to define LS1=< {"1"/1} at depth 1 > LS2=< {"A"/2} at depth 2 > LS3=< {"i"/2} at depth 2 > LS4=< {"a"/2} at depth 2 > This is what KOffice does: a list level defines one level, not 10. Then the number of the parent paragraph that appears due to display-levels=2 always has the same formatting as the one that was actually used for that paragraph. Referring to a paragraph called "1." as "A." makes no sense! Of course you can get the above result by making sure all list levels start with "1"/1 but that's just duplication of information. -- David Faure, faure@kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]