On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:23 PM Kieren MacMillan < kie...@kierenmacmillan.info> wrote:
> Hi Paolo, > > > I still prefer to have these fields totally decoupled. > > The fields *are* totally decoupled… > > No, they are not. They are coupled on the first page. Then they are partially decoupled, not totally decoupled. > > I think it's reasonable that the copyright appears at the bottom, as > default, but I don't understand the choice to couple it to the footer of > the first page. > > 1. I don't understand how you would include the copyright field > information in the footer [of any page] without referencing the > field/property in the footer definition. > I don't understand what you mean, sorry. Copyright IMHO should not be coupled with the footer, as a field, even if it appears at the bottom of the page. It can appear on the top of the page as well. But it is reasonable that its default is to appear at the bottom. > > 2. I don't believe I've ever used a text/page layout application which > allowed multiple footers on a single page. > > Please explain how you would like to see the "issue" resolved, > specifically in light of those two points. > > (just a first idea) This can be solved by having a footer with separate user settable fields. For example: footer.text1, footer.text2 etc. Then you don't have to use a "copyright" field at all. Best, P On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:23 PM Kieren MacMillan < kie...@kierenmacmillan.info> wrote: > Hi Paolo, > > > I still prefer to have these fields totally decoupled. > > The fields *are* totally decoupled… > > > I think it's reasonable that the copyright appears at the bottom, as > default, but I don't understand the choice to couple it to the footer of > the first page. > > 1. I don't understand how you would include the copyright field > information in the footer [of any page] without referencing the > field/property in the footer definition. > > 2. I don't believe I've ever used a text/page layout application which > allowed multiple footers on a single page. > > Please explain how you would like to see the "issue" resolved, > specifically in light of those two points. > > Thanks, > Kieren.
