On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Christian Lohmaier <lohmaier+libreoff...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi UX-Advise, *, > > > Cons: [..] > * visible cursor travelling, input sequence checking and detection of > writing mode that are only active for CTL might have a tiny > performance impact
Either it _has_ a tiny performance impact or it _might_ have a performance impact But qualifying a performance impact, that has not been measured, as 'tiny' up-front, is 'begging the question'. (note: it is quite possible that the impact, if any, is tiny/negligible... I'm just objecting to the biased wording of the statement of 'fact') > > Pros: > * One less entry in Tools|Options (in case it is removed completely) > * not treating CTL/Asian scripts as second class (<quote>not to > mention that "Asian" is a so ignorant > orientalistic term in this context</quote>) http://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/Orientalistic I'm quite confused as to what was meant by this quote. > * will work out-of the box for all users No regression for any document that does not rely on these features today ? (note: This is not a rhetorical question. I honestly do not know if these options only impact the UI or if they also can impact the way a document is rendered) Norbert Note: I have no strong feeling either way. But I'd prefer if the discussion center on practical and technical aspect rather than politically correct ones. _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
