[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #12 from m.a.riosv --- Why not add your script as extension to the https://extensions.libreoffice.org/ so it serves to everyone to create it for their own designs on the styles. -- You are receiving this mail because: You ar

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #11 from Jambunathan K --- (In reply to m.a.riosv from comment #10) > It's no easy to understand what you want. I have already provided what I want, and I have also provided how one may produce what I want. See the `odt` and

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 m.a.riosv changed: What|Removed |Added CC||miguelangelrv@libreoffice.o

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #9 from Jambunathan K --- > > Not only the indentation levels, but the trailing whitespace following a > > paragraph should also need to be co-ordinated. The fact that list styles > > like `List 1`, `List 1 Cont`, `List 1

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #8 from Mike Kaganski --- (In reply to Jambunathan K from comment #6) > > Based on how much demand is this "of course"? WONTFIX IMO. No real use case, > > other than for a single person in the universe > > The comment makes a

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #7 from Jambunathan K --- (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #5) > (In reply to Jambunathan K from comment #4) > > ... Of course, LibreOffice should provide a means for creating this `odt` or > > `ott` file. > > Based on

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #6 from Jambunathan K --- (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #5) > (In reply to Jambunathan K from comment #4) > > ... Of course, LibreOffice should provide a means for creating this `odt` or > > `ott` file. > > Based on

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #5 from Mike Kaganski --- (In reply to Jambunathan K from comment #4) > ... Of course, LibreOffice should provide a means for creating this `odt` or > `ott` file. Based on how much demand is this "of course"? WONTFIX IMO. No

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 --- Comment #4 from Jambunathan K --- > This feature request is based on my original question [How do I create a > `ott’ template that includes “default” style definitions; by “default” > styles, I mean ALL the “factory styles” that sh

[Bug 158728] Feature Request: Add a facility to create a `ott’ template that includes ALL the “default” style definitions;

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158728 Jambunathan K changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Feature Request: Create a |Feature Request: Add a