https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160686
Cor Nouws <c...@nouenoff.nl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #27 from Cor Nouws <c...@nouenoff.nl> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #26) > (In reply to Cor Nouws from comment #25) > > If you don't even notice that people describe use cases, how can we then > > help? > > My point is, that when one actually spells out a supposed use case for these speaking of a 'supposed use case' looks like a nasty habit of making other people's experiences ridiculous or fake. I strongly object that behavior. > styles - either the use case is reasonable/common, but then - the pair of > styles don't fit the use case on a closer inspection; or the use case is > convoluted and contrived, in which case it does not merit to have a pair of > styles pre-defined for it. I can't help that for you the altering of left and right pages is not a clear use case. But it is. And the option (offered in the UI) to insert blank pages on print/expert, is just an extra support to get the desired result. Looking at a simple constructed 3 page document to 'prove' that it is weird, is not a serious use case. > With David's use case, it has been the second option: As we examined the > behavior of the two page styles, and David verified that this behavior is > his use case (well, I'll take him at his word anyway) - it became clear it > is a niche and rather weird use case, with inconsistently-styled blank-page > inserts, sometimes without the user having requested them. David showed that it works as designed. You make that ridiculous by creating a green border on one special page and complaining that inserted blank pages are missing header/footer information - which to me is just expected. > The contrivance is more obvious when one considers RTL documents, or > documents which are partly RTL and partly LTR, where some simplifying > assumptions cannot be made. Realizing this fact made Regina and Heiko > suggest "salvaging" this pair of styles as "odd" and "even" - but here too: > If one spells out that use case fully, one reaches the same dichotomy. So the only issue that there seems to be, but it is one that I cannot oversee - is that it (maybe) not serves the RTL use case. Please do make a clear report with examples that also people not used to RTL can understand. Thanks, Cor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.