RA Brown - rabr...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote:
openoffice.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
RA Brown - rabr...@the-martin-byrd.net wrote:
It is probably out on the limits of reason but I see it as a very
favorable feature.
For example, I have to deal with several related files of a large group
of people. A retirement facility that has state regulations that state
what forms have to be maintained. Some of these forms have to have
signature(s) on them. to store electronic copies these forms are scanned
into PDFs. Other forms use a spreadsheet to keep from having to
rewrite/retype the form. Letters are typed up for mailing to family
members, with copies retained for reference.
Currently I use a subdirectory for each "client" with all these
different files which use different applications to open/edit/print. If
the DOF standard were expanded to cover all these then I would only have
to deal with one application. As side effect is a self-creating archive
that could be stored without having to pack/zip all the files.
But that one application would have to be able to handle every
conceivable file type, which no application is ever going to be able
to do itself. It would still have to call on separate applications to
do anything with the documents.
It seems to me that your current solution is exactly what
subdirectories are for - storing a collection of related documents,
possibly in different formats. If you need to pack them into a single
file, e.g. to send to someone else, why not just use a format designed
to do just that, like zip?
Hi Mark,
I can see the problem of adding the PDF features as that is a total
different file structure. Having both text and spreadsheet documents in
the same file looks very reasonable, so far. I am looking at information
related to the ODF file structures. As I stated before the odt and ods
files are only containers, zipped, of the real files. Most of the actual
files are xml files, contents.xml is the one that has the data to be
displayed, the others contain instructions on _how_ to display the data.
Andy
Not being an OpenOffice.org developer, I'm not familiar with details of
the code or file formats, however...
I don't see any technical reason that several ODF documents couldn't be
stored within a single file. It could perhaps be as simple as a new
document type which is a zip file (as other ODF files are) within which
is a directory for each document with the current structure of that
document type. Such a file type would presumably have to go through the
standardisation process.
If accepted, it would probably require a lot of changes within
OpenOffice code, so I'd imagine this being a long-term goal. I wouldn't
expect it before version 4, and wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't done
until version 5 or even later.
The user interface could get confusing with all the proposed uses for
tabs. There are already two discussions going on here:
1. tabs for each file opened within a single OpenOffice.org window
2. tabs for each document within the file
plus the current:
3. tabs for each page within a Draw document or sheet within a Calc
document (note that Calc sheets are NOT separate documents, they are
more like pages of a single document).
That's the potential for up to three rows of tabs! Personally I wouldn't
want the first. I prefer one window per file as it is at the moment as
that way it's easier to switch between documents in different
applications - alt-tab directly to the document, rather than alt-tab to
the application then ctrl-tab to the document. The GIMP has a separate
window per file, and newer versions of Adobe reader also take that
approach having switched away from a single-instance application.
A row of tabs across the top for each document within the file, with a
row at the bottom for Calc/Draw pages (as at present) would seem reasonable.
Mark.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org
