Am Freitag, 14. April 2006 04:44 schrieb Louis Desjardins: > >Am Freitag, 14. April 2006 01:30 schrieb Craig Bradney: > >> On Friday 14 April 2006 01:28, Christoph Sch?fer wrote: > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > I thought about filing a bug, but it might be better to hear what > >> > others think about it. > >> > > >> > In the properties palette, there's an option in the shape tab called > >> > "Use bounding box". To me this sounds a bit misleading since > >> > "bounding box" is a postscript term, and it could be possible for > >> > users to confuse this with an EPS bounding box. Does anyone using the > >> > English version think it's necessary to change the words to be > >> > non-ambiguous? > >> > > >> > I'm curious about your thoughts. > >> > >> And a better name is? > > > >Perhaps "Surrounding box" as in the tool tip? > > Hi Craig! > Beste Christoph!
Bonjour Louis, > > This conversation made me discover that in 1.3.4 cvs it doesn't > matter wether you pick runaround or not, a text frame on top of > another always makes the text to runaround. (I think this is a bug > but I didn't check with previous versions.) Franz has fixed it :) > > And... unless you have an unregular shape, (or at least not one that > has four 90 degrees angles) there is simply (and obviously) no > difference between checking the 1st check box AND the 2nd or checking > only the 1st one. Of course it doesn't make any difference if a simple rectangle is in the frame, but as soon as the user changes the shape,it's a huge difference. > > I guess that it would be clearer to have these 2 sub options indented > a bit below the main Runaround option. Would be a little more > obvious, in my view. Since we have three clearly different options available, it'd be probably more clear if they could be selected separately, not 2 and 3 depending on selecting 1. > > Your turn! :-) > > ? bient?t! > > Louis ? bient?t! Christoph
