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

List:       openoffice-users
Subject:    Re: Re: Question about setting master document headers
From:       rbe <rbe () flash ! net>
Date:       2004-05-27 8:46:28
Message-ID: c949t3$8ld$1 () sea ! gmane ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Apologies in advance for the long reply.

Bruce Byfield wrote:

> rbe wrote:
>> 
>> And it still will not save any headers and footers.  Try it.  Close
>> the document and OOo and reopen.  You may or may not see headers,
>> but by the second or third opening, they will be lost.  In 1.1.2rc,
>> they will always be lost on reopening.  The only place to get them
>> to stick is to insert them in the template.  (issue #27008)

> I may be missing something, but I don't see the problem. The logic of
> OOo is centered around templates and styles, and by this logic,
> templates are where headers and footers should be stored. If fields
> are used to create header and footer contents, than everything is
> recreated as necessary, and the system works fine so far as I can see.

Not true in simple documents.  

If I have a generic template, I also need the ability to modify headers 
and footers to match the current situation (for example, I have a 
generic "Letter" style which has headers and footers modified in the 
resulting document to fit a variety of situations).  I also have a 
number of other generic templates which use different headers and 
footers as identification in the generated document and not in the 
template.  The changed headers and footers are saved with the document 
when it is saved, thus allowing me to use one template for many 
different uses.

This IS the default behavior for simple documents.  Manual changes to 
styles -- all styles -- in the generaged document override the template 
(as promised by the Help files).
 
> I suspect that there is a very good reason for this arrangement.
> Apparently one of the reasons that MS Word's master document feature
> is unstable is because it stores information in the template, the
> subdocuments and the master document. If any of these don't agree,
> then corruption sets in - and it almost always does, sooner or later.
> By storing this information only in the template, OOo offers a much
> more stable master document.

I agree.  However, it also has the ability to accept manual overrides 
(a source of frustration for people who use manual changes without 
thought in a simple document).
 
> rbe also wrote in another e-mail in this thread:
> 
>  > Essentiall, all page headers and footers must
>  > be set in the template for each page style.  Outline numbering must
>  > be set in the template as well.  That means that no template can be
>  > used (as a MD template) for any other than a single document, thus
>  > defeating the whole reason for templates

> Can you explain what you mean here? Either I am missing the logic
> entirely here, or you work in a very different way from me, because I
> have never seen the limitation that you describe.

I have a number of different publishers that use the same basic formats 
and styles for the text, but require different header and footer 
content.  On top of that, I prefer to have my working copy use specific 
and unique headers until I am through with the document and ready to 
submit it.

In 1.0, I could insert the headers and footers in the MD and they 
stuck, allowing me to use the same basic template with all the required 
styles, but make changes to headers, footers and outline numbering 
required by the different publishers.  This is as expected if one reads 
the Help files -- manual changes in the basic document, styles and so 
on are saved with the basic document.  They can be overriden by the 
template by using Format > Default, but not otherwise.

Worse, such things as title names in the headers and footers can not be 
set simply in the MD but must be set in the template associated with 
each and every page style (two for each -- first page and following 
pages).  

Thus, for example, I could have a template for "Book - Citadel" for one 
publisher or (as is the case) "Book - Groups", which I can use for 
multiple groups.  That would be ideal and I could use the headers and 
footers required by the particular submission if and only if it were 
stored in the MD.  Since it is not, I am required to have a "Book - 
Citadel - U.S. Constitution", "Book - Citadel - Whiskey Rebellion" and 
so on -- one template for each book.   I cannot use the generic "Book - 
Citadel" template -- at all.
 
> In the issue, you mention introducing "outline numbering, headers and
> footers into the MD (and NOT in the template)," and this may be where
> our work methods differ. Usually, the only content I put into a master
> document is tables of contents and indexes, and some manual page
> breaks to make the page count come out evenly so that chapters start
> on the right side of a page spread.

(HOW I WORK TO DO THE SAME THING): I don't use manual page breaks 
except between major sections.  Each chapter begins with a Heading 
style that has an associated "Page break with style ..." so that they 
automatically begin on the appropriate page (all right side, as you do) 
without the introduction of manual breaks.  The manual breaks I do use 
are between TOC, pre-matter, book chapters, appendices (if any) and 
indexes.  

(A PROBLEM I HAVE FOUND - NOT THE SAME ISSUE): I have found that I must 
begin a MD with a "Text" section or the ability to force page styles is 
jeopardized, so that is where I put the pre-matter (normally small 
italic numerals) OR a submission or title page.

I write on a wide variety of subjects under a wide number of pseudonyms 
and could readily use MD'S for books, complex articles and so on.  That 
would reduce my Book and Article templates to a fairly small number of 
really useful templates allowing me to modify the MD'S to have the 
headers and footers the way the subject matter or publisher requires.  
As it is, introducing them into the MD does not save them with the MD 
and I am required to produce a huge number of templates -- one for each 
article and book.  This conflicts with the claim that manual changes 
override the template.

Note that this issue does NOT crop up in simple documents. If each 
article and book were written as a single document the outline 
numbering, headers and footers are retained in the single document so 
for such things as pamphlets, small books (under 45 pages) and simple 
documents can each use its own template but I do not need a separate 
template for each article, pamphlet or small book.  In other words, all 
manual changes override any template settings and I would have to use 
Format > Default to return to the template styles.

This latter does not work if I change the style definition in the 
simple document.  To change it back to template defaults, I have to use 
Tools > Styles > Load and reload my original style definition and 
(sometimes) THEN use Format > Default.  Works like a charm.  I can 
modify a template style in the simple document for a special usage not 
wanted in the template and then change my mind and go back to the 
template optio or recognize that the template needs changing and change 
it there.  Lots of flexibility and usefulness.

For an MD, on the other hand, such an easy and simple facility is not 
available as the templates override any style settings each and every 
time the document is loaded, including outline numbering, headers and 
footers.

In other words, what we have is, for simple (single) documents, the 
following situation:

I can have a unique template for types of documents.  The generated 
document is defined by the associated template.  Outline numbering, 
headers and footers are saved as overrides when the document is saved 
and is retained even if the template is changed.  I have found I can 
force an exception by introducing a header in the template and then, 
the next time the document is opened, the changed header overrides 
whatever I have put in the document or reload the template styles and 
use Format > Default.  This is as I would expect.

To use my "special" header in the original document, I must first 
remove the header from the template and then reinsert the proper header 
in the regular document and, amazing to behold, it then is saved with 
and referenced by the document.

I expect the same behavior with a MD, but find it is not done.  The 
templates override the inserted headers and footers -- that is, they 
are blank.  

This contradicts the instructions which say that manual changes to the 
MD override template changes and identically named styles in the 
sub-documents.  Thus, if I have a "text body" style that is different 
from the "text body" style in a sub-document OR the template, that 
change is kept in the MD.

Priority of style changes in a single document:
Manual changes override Template.  (There have been a few complaints 
about this, but it is apparently quietly accepted when it is explained.)

In an MD, the priority is this:
Manual changes override Template in all but Outline Numbering, headers 
and footers in which case Template overrides Manual changes.  This 
despite the declared comment that changes to a style in the MD override 
an identically named style in a sub-document.

IMO, both simple and MD documents need to follow the same priorities.

I"ve gone around this tree several times because some developers seem 
not to understand why I would want identical behavior in generated 
documents regardless of whether the document is a simple document or an 
MD.  Wanting this might also explain to the developers why people who 
use sections a lot (not MD'S) want to be able to define page and 
paragraph styles in the document containing the sections and not in the 
sections themselves.

This last (a different but related issue) is frequently due to the 
inserted section having different formatting because it was intended 
for a different purpose, but the styles cannot be changed in the 
document from what they were in the linked (or inserted) sections.  
This is especially frustrating when an inserted section has a different 
page style and it covers more than one page.  It's why I don't use 
sections except for research notes where I could care less about style 
changes.

-- 
Robert Black Eagle




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