Volk, Andrew M wrote:
I am writing to suggest that the filename of the file being edited in
Writer should be in the header line (or somewhere in the frame).
I am writing documents which are going through a lot of edits between me
and a collaborator on the Web. To keep the versions straight,
Hello All!
Have either of you filed a feature request or bug report about this? I
would sure vote for the option as it is in v1.1.x.
SC
On 5/30/05, Peter Kupfer OOo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Volk, Andrew M wrote:
> > I am writing to suggest that the filename of the file being edited in
>
Sweet Coffee wrote:
Hello All!
Have either of you filed a feature request or bug report about this? I
would sure vote for the option as it is in v1.1.x.
SC
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=17856
Be careful when entering this debate. There is a faction of OOodom that
thinks
rg
Cc: Volk, Andrew M
Subject: Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Volk, Andrew M wrote:
> I am writing to suggest that the filename of the file being edited in
> Writer should be in the header line (or somewhere in the frame).
>
> I am writing documents which are go
Volk, Andrew M wrote:
I am writing to suggest that the filename of the file being edited in
Writer should be in the header line (or somewhere in the frame).
I am writing documents which are going through a lot of edits between me
and a collaborator on the Web. To keep the versions straight,
Volk, Andrew M wrote:
Ah! Thanks for the tip. It works great (after you save the file).
(Contentious? Well, I like the filename for documents, so I'm happy.)
Andrew Volk
I like the way 1.1.x treats it, in so far as I have a choice, between
the file name or the file title. If I am edited s
I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
can actually see what it's called.
The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
*do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without
prompt to the user) and you want to see the actual filename,
Chad Smith wrote:
I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
can actually see what it's called.
The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
*do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without
prompt to the user) and you want to see
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> Chad Smith wrote:
>> I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
>> can actually see what it's called.
>>
>> The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
>> *do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without
>
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
Chad Smith wrote:
I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
can actually see what it's called.
The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
*do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
...
All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support
long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document
also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-)
The only case where I really prefer the title
Rich wrote:
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
...
All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support
long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document
also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-)
The only case where I really
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
Rich wrote:
...
if properly used it could be useful part of document management systems.
How, if you never see it?
if properly used, you do :)
it would be indexed and you could sort/search for it (as one of many fields)
--
Rich
-
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> 1) What is so bad about having an option?
Of course basically nothing except possible bloat. :-)
We didn't close the issue, so it can be worked on. My current favorite
is to switch on displaying the title not as a global option, but as a
document specific one. If you en
Rich wrote:
> oh. i just hate when extension is not shown ;)
> btw, oo.org does not show extension when opening a .doc file. is this
> intentional ?
>
> also, i managed today with m104 achieve a situation by closing/opening
> doc/odt files all the time that also odt extension was not shown, so
Mathias Bauer wrote:
> All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support
long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document
making title and file name the same. ;-)
However, if you are moving a file between comouters (by email, web, CD
etc.), non-latin fi
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 18:26:38 PM +0200, Mathias Bauer
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed?
>
> You can use it in different places. And IMHO the title indeed is
> superfluous on most operating systems because you can use long file
> names
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 07:48:22 AM +0200, io ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Changing the CMS system where all this stuff is archived and
> searched according to those filenames would cost a lot, so nobody
> does it. So it may be as ugly as hell, but is not going to go away
> soon.
>
> So, unless yo
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
>
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
> > All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support
>> long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document
>> making title and file name the same. ;-)
>
> However, if you are moving a file between comouters (b
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 14:39:41 PM +0200, Mathias Bauer
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Yes, that's a good argument for titles, thanks for adding this.
You're welcome. Glad to have added some useful information.
> So titles aren't superfluous in specific workflows with specific
> kinds of documents w
Mathias Bauer wrote:
If the file name was good enough to identify the
document in the file browser, it should be good enough for the caption
bar also (at the end the caption bar is just a means for identifying the
document).
But the Latin name in the file browser is *not* good enough- it is jus
Peter Kupfer OOo a écrit :
Rich wrote:
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
...
All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support
long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document
also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-)
M. Fioretti wrote:
> Just one final comment: keep in mind that the workflows with this
> "problem" may be "specific" as in "a minority" when you count the
> percentage of organizations which have this problem. But if you look
> at *which* organizations have it, they will certainly be a non
> negli
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> If the file name was good enough to identify the
>> document in the file browser, it should be good enough for the caption
>> bar also (at the end the caption bar is just a means for identifying the
>> document).
>
> But the Latin name in the file
Le dimanche 05 juin 2005 à 11:44 +0200, Mathias Bauer a écrit :
> Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> > Mathias Bauer wrote:
> >> If the file name was good enough to identify the
> >> document in the file browser, it should be good enough for the caption
> >> bar also (at the end the caption bar is just a m
Mathias Bauer wrote:
I hoped to get some comments on my idea to use a document specific
property wether the title should be displayed or the file name, until
now to no avail.
If such setting would travel with the document (.i.e.- I email the
document to someone, and when he/she opens it they g
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> I hoped to get some comments on my idea to use a document specific
>> property wether the title should be displayed or the file name, until
>> now to no avail.
>
> If such setting would travel with the document (.i.e.- I email the
> document to s
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> If you want something that works for humans you should display whatever
> string uses the biggest font size on the first page. Then fallback on
> highest hierachy title, title metadata, filename.
That sounds like a smart idea, but I don't trust automatic "smart"
procedure
Le dimanche 05 juin 2005 à 12:59 +0200, Mathias Bauer a écrit :
> > The truth is humans suck at entering nice title metadata where software
> > can find it (and metadata includes filenames)
>
> I don't doubt that, but obviously the file name (or the title) the user
> has chosen was good enough fo
At 06/05/05 04:44, Mathias Bauer wrote:
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>> If the file name was good enough to identify the
>> document in the file browser, it should be good enough for the caption
>> bar also (at the end the caption bar is just a means for identifying the
>> docu
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le dimanche 05 juin 2005 à 12:59 +0200, Mathias Bauer a écrit :
>
>> > The truth is humans suck at entering nice title metadata where software
>> > can find it (and metadata includes filenames)
>>
>> I don't doubt that, but obviously the file name (or the title) the user
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
I hoped to get some comments on my idea to use a document specific
property wether the title should be displayed or the file name, until
now to no avail.
If such setting would travel with the document (.i.e.- I email the
do
33 matches
Mail list logo
