[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: OOo documents look different



On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 08:23 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mardi 11 juillet 2006 à 01:38 +0200, Erwin Rol a écrit :
> 
> > > Hypothetically, if OOo in FC5 rendered differently than on Windows, would
> > > you consider it a bug or a problem if it were changed for FC6 to render
> > > closer (even identical) to Windows but this made it different from FC5
> > > and earlier?
> > 
> > I see a WYSIWYG word processor like a painting program. When I create a
> > painting with gimp, I expect it to look the same when I open it with
> > photoshop. Of course there might be tiny difference like photoshop might
> > use another JPG decoder and so maybe some pixels have a bit of a
> > difference. If i would not want this i should use another picture
> > format. The same with word processors, there might be some tiny
> > differences in how the font is rendered, but not like now that one page
> > fits about 5 lines less (that are than move to the next page). 
> 
> An office document is not a bitmap and the WYSIWYG part has always been
> more a best effort thing than a hard commitment.
> 
> An office document is a set of construction rules. This is why you have
> individual hight-level components (characters) you can change later. Try
> that with a jpg where pixels are frozen and shapes are not shapes you
> can manipulate but collections of pixels.

Once again, you can give 1000 technical reasons or metaphors, my
expectation (and that of several others) is that OOo should be able to
reproduce a saved document in the same way it looked when it was
created. 

And apart from not reproducing the document correctly, it also now
renders text extremely ugly with the big font height, there ends up way
to much space between the lines. 

- Erwin







[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]