[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Adding names to implicit framesets in kword
From:       shaheed <srhaque () iee ! org>
Date:       2001-06-02 0:00:48
[Download RAW message or body]


> > As for "<FORMAT id="2"><IMAGE> " going away, I have to think abut that.
>
> So you're using it, as opposed to a picture frameset ?
> We can keep it, but I'd be surprised that we really need it.

I *was* using this, but would like to move to framesets as you suggested. 
However, there is a feature supported by PIXMAPs which we will loose...

> > I think that we will need an additional NAME element as the existing
> > PIXMAP "name" and "key" are wrong for this purpose. Currently, "key" is
> > the incoming name of the image (e.g. the /file/name.png) and "name" is
> > the location in the .kwd file where it is stored (e.g.
> > part0/pictures/picture.png). This avoids the image being stored multiple
> > timesf or the case of a pixmap used in a header/footer.
>
> Hmm, header and footers only need to be specified once, the "copy"
> behaviour makes them repeated anyway....

Agreed about the "copy" in the header footer case. But the real point is that 
if you are intending to remove PIXMAPs, then this ability to elide multiple 
instances of an image into a single stored instance will be lost, since this 
concept is not natural to framesets.

OTOH, perhaps this feature was a solution in search of a non-existant 
problem? What do the pros think (Thomas Z and D)?

Thanks, Shaheed
_______________________________________________
Koffice-devel mailing list
Koffice-devel@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]