MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
office message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office] Updated proposal for lines (underlining, crossing-out, overline)
To clarify what I was getting at in the meeting:
The thin/medium/thick entries should be considered 'styles' in my honest
opinion. Ideally, anyone should be able to add new line styles AT ANY
TIME. The fact that few, if any application supports this at the current
time is a limitation we don't want to have to deal with ever. By putting
this information into 'styles' (including the auto/numbering), we are
properly separating the 'style and formatting' from the document itself.
We are allowing having different styles (i.e. single, double, automatic
single, automatic double), but underlining has no intrinsic semantic
meaning other than 'look at me'.
I suggest that we have one entry "text-underline-style" that references
a style name at ALL TIMES. Any number (such as used in CSS3) would be
discovered by looking at either: a default "style sheet", or within the
document itself.
Number format(s), and aspects relating to 'automatic font-size matching'
should be held specifically in the underline style description
specifically. The 'thick' style should refer to a underline style that
has the thickness calculatable by: (font-height /
font-to-underline-divisor ) * scale-factor * unit_of_measure_to_pixel
for an example.
As Michael suggests, having some 'defaults' will not be a bad thing. But
we should make it a requirement that before finalizing this
specification, that these defaults are documented within the underline
style section of a 'style file' for use by other applications wanting to
be able to reuse those style types.
If someone wants a 3-pixel underline, for the purposes of the
OpenOfficeXML format, should be created as an underline style that names
this.