https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136434
--- Comment #11 from Mike Kaganski <mikekagan...@hotmail.com> ---
(In reply to Christian Lehmann from comment #9)
> (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Christian Lehmann from comment #0)
> >
> > To check the claims, please save the file as a FODT, and then inspect the
> > resulting XML, for simplicity - you would have everything in one XML.
> >
> > > File ‘content.xml’
> > > The section “<office:font-face-decls>” contains 9 font faces only one of
> > > which is used in this document.
> >
> > Wrong. All 9 are used either in styles, or in text.
>
> It appears we are talking past each other. What matters to the user is what
> he can see in the editing window. The nine font declarations mention fonts
> like 'Lohit Devanagari', 'Noto Sans CJK' and the like, none of which are
> visible to the user in this particular document, be it in direct formats, be
> it in the styles applied. I conclude that this information (whatever its
> origin) does not need to be stored in the file.
It only is "not visible" to you because you chose not to see it: namely, you
likely don't have Asian and CTL support enabled in Options->Language
Settings->Languages. It is *hidden* from people that don't choose to see it,
but it doesn't mean it's inaccessible, or that it should be dropped. The styles
(and direct formatting) has the full set of settings that describes its
appearance, which includes possibility that someone later types a Chinese or
Arabic characters there in that paragraph.
> >
> > > In the section ‘<office:automatic-styles>’, several text styles have the
> > > same definition, differing only in the value of the attribute
> > > ‘officeooo:rsid’; but this is devoid of useful effects. In this sense, the
> > > following styles are the same:
> > > “T1” - “T6”
> > > “T7” - “T12”
> > > “T13” and “T14”.
> >
> > See comment 3.
> That is certainly a helpful hint. However, again, why would you want to
> store this information with the file, if it is inaccessible the user?
It is available - when user uses Edit->Track Changes->Compare Document.
>
> >
> > > Styles T4 – T6 contain specifications of fonts which are never used.
> >
> > This doesn't make sense. The fonts are "used" as soon as the style is used.
> > If characters present in a text run that uses the style (DF actually) don't
> > need some script, that doesn't mean "the style should be cleaned up, such as
> > when user finally decides to write some Arabic or Chinese characters, they
> > would appear in something else compared to what had been defined
> > originally".
>
> Again, this answer doesn't make sense to me. Let's consider an example: The
> XML alleges that a style named 'T4' is applied to the word 'block' in the
> file. This fact, however, is not visible to the user. In his perspective,
> the entire paragraph is formatted with the Default Character Style. "T4" is
> in no way accessible to him.
The automatic styles is the LibreOffice way to express direct formatting. So T4
*is* available to user, through properties of the text that has this automatic
style applied.
> >
> > > The section ‘<text:sequence-decls>’ contains five declarations none of
> > > which
> > > is used in the text.
> >
> > The sequence definitions are data by their own, just like, say, styles or
> > macros. You won't want your macros in a document to disappear on save just
> > because there were no buttons inserted in the document that used the macros.
> > Likewise, prepared sequence definitions or styles are part of data, that
> > must be saved.
> >
> > That there are several sequence definitions pre-created by default, is a
> > different story ...
> I was just referring to these.
This is orthogonal to redundancy. If you want, you should create something like
"LibreOffice should not pre-create sequences for illustrations etc.",
separately.
>
> >
> > > The section ‘<office:text>’ contains 13 occurrences of the tag ‘<text:span
> > > text:style-name="Kommentarzeichen">’. A style of this name is also listed
> > > among the “Applied Styles” in the panel “Character Styles”. It is, in
> > > fact,
> > > not applied in the document.
> >
> > It is, in fact, *is* applied in the document. E.g., to text "¿Bá
> > jé".
>
> This is true. Since it is not an LO Writer Style, it probably stems from an
> earlier MS Word version of the document. Again, the question is why a style
> that was specified at the level of a block - in this case, a comment - is
> assigned to single elements contained in the block.
This is not related to this issue, and is something to ask the author.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
