M. Fioretti wrote: > In large companies there are huge quantities of internal docs whose > file name have been longer than 8.3 for years but, by company policy, > must be the human-unreadable part number of the product they refer > to. Sometimes preceeded by the equally unreadable acronym of the > long-gone department who developed them.
Yes, that's a good argument for titles, thanks for adding this. The workflow you described IMHO is also a legacy but is is something that indeed can happen. I still see titles as a legacy, but I admit that the term "superfluous" is an exaggeration. So titles aren't superfluous in specific workflows with specific kinds of documents where for whatever reasons the user is not free in chosing the file name of his documents. I understand that in case of the documents you mentioned it can be desirable to see the title instead of the file names, but you still can get documents from others, e.g. a Word document with the stupid automatic title. So I think also here displaying the title should be a document specific property instead of a global option in the program. You have to enter the title anyway, additionally setting a checkmark in the same dialog wouldn't hurt. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
