--Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 10:30:36PM +0200, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> On Sonntag, 14. Juli 2002 10:33, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 03:54:13PM +1000, Clarence Dang wrote:
> > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 06:48, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> (...)
> >
> > What about an extra table cell that has a 'completed' bar in there.
> > Expressed in percents.  This way you don't have to downgrade certain
> > filters (never underestimate the psycologocal effects of that!).
>=20
> It unfotunately does not solve the problem that we have with the MS Word=
=20
> filter. For Word 97 documents, it works well. For Word XP, it seems to ha=
ve=20
> problems. So you would still have to downgrade something even on a "compl=
ete"=20
> bar.

Hmm, I think you misunderstood me.

With downgrading I meant to make it lower then it was before.  In the case =
of
the percentile progress you can't downgrade since there was no former value.

> And you will get this problem with any file format that evolves.
>=20
> Otherwise, yes, you are right, downgrades have to be avoided. That is why=
 I=20
> have downgraded nearly all "good" labels to "working" at once, to avoid t=
hat=20
> further user critics force us to downgrade them filter by filter.

Overall I think you are taking the labels and percentile too serious (I am =
mostly
talking about your second mail here), the only reason I proposed it was to =
show
without an external reference-chart what a certain name stands for. So it w=
ould
be nothing more then;

    alfa  - 10%
    beta  - 25%
    good  - 50%
      :     :
    complete - 98%

I don't think it makes any sense to change the filter status after a rework=
ing
of the internal file-format of KWord, as long as it is fixed before the rel=
ease
nobody will be the wiser.

--=20
Thomas Zander                                           zander@planescape.c=
om
                                                 We are what we pretend to =
be

--Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAj01AOoACgkQCojCW6H2z/T0ewCePGN0xmNsTSIhH2hEWqU3VqgA
uNQAn3PpwiPkft9/3dhbVJwAyNV2NODj
=5Fzu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q--
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel