I agree with the "On the spot" need. Quite simply, Reveal Codes allows me to see what's going with a glance.
With so many features, the interaction between them can make formatting unexpectedly difficult. Like salt and pepper, use when needed! On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Richard Detwiler <[email protected]> wrote: > What I don't understand, and I'm sure I must be missing something so > please explain, is how come this discussion seems to suggest that it's > either/or -- meaning, "use styles for all formatting" or "we HAVE to have > "reveal codes" to not use styles". > > I've used styles a lot with Open Office and I greatly appreciate how > valuable they can be; for example, I edit a newsletter and styles have made > my life way easier and made the resulting newsletter way more consistent. > > On the other hand, there are many places, in smaller documents, where I > want to format something on the spot without setting up styles -- changing > the spacing between paragraphs, making some text bold, indenting a > paragraph, etc., and I often do that without using styles. And it works > just fine. > > So if someone wants to use styles, they can use them. If someone doesn't > want to use styles and do formatting on the spot without going through > styles, that can be done too. So why the implied necessity for "reveal > codes" for people who choose not to use styles? > > > Jim McLaughlin wrote: > >> This has been a very interesting thread. >> >> It has also been the single most posted to thread I've seen in the six or >> so months I've been a subscrber to this group. >> >> What fascinates me is that other than the three defender's of OO >> "orthodoxy" regarding "styles" ve. alternative methods, like a WP "reveal >> codes" approach, the overwhelming majority of posters appear to desire the >> WP/Corel "Reveal Codes" option to the very steep learning curve of the >> "styles " approach. >> >> Food for thought. >> >> If the programmers behind OO want to provide a word processor which will >> attract users, and avoid the very high costs of the MJKS or Corel >> products, >> those programmers might want to seriously consider the efficacy of >> providing what the users who have expressed an opinion appear to want, >> rather tahn take the "...my way or the highway..." approach expresseed >> here >> so far. >> >> Not trying to start a pissing contest. Just pointing out what the >> admittedly unscientifif opinion sample in this thread has so far shown. >> >> Is there a technical reason why a Corel/WP "Reveal Codes" function can >> not >> be implemented in 5.x.x? >> >> >> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Doug <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 05/14/2014 02:12 PM, Bruce Byfield wrote: >>> >>> On Wednesday 14 May 2014 05:29:45 PM Brian Barker wrote: >>>> >>>> At 23:38 14/05/2014 +1000, Marina Tadiello wrote: >>>>> >>>>> In general, and from a user's perspective, Styles are one example of >>>>>> how common users are encouraged (or forced? :-) to think ("program") >>>>>> and behave like computers. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, manual formatting is available. But using it is kind of >>>>> perverse, >>>>> >>>> because >>>> it means doing more work than necessary, and cutting yourself off from >>>> important features. >>>> >>>> Here's how I describe manual formatting in the introduction to the book >>>> I'm in >>>> the middle of completing: >>>> >>>> "Office suites are as old as the personal computer. Yet, after more than >>>> thirty >>>> years, few of us have bothered to learn how to use them. >>>> >>>> "Oh, we have learned how to get things done in them. Most of us can >>>> format a >>>> document and print it out, after a fashion. But what we haven't learned >>>> is to >>>> do these things efficiently, taking advantage of all the tools that are >>>> available. >>>> >>>> "It is as if we have learned enough about cars to go down hill in them >>>> and >>>> coast across level ground, but never learned about the ignition. We get >>>> things >>>> done, but with more effort and less efficiency that we should. Some >>>> tasks, like >>>> going uphill, we don't imagine are even possible because of our limited >>>> view." >>>> >>>> I, being an enemy of "styles," in general, explain myself thusly: I >>>> >>> probably >>> never write anything more than three pages long. I am not writing a book. >>> I don't have chapters. I don't use bulletted lists, altho I might if >>> bullets were easier to use _without_ styles! I don't have "Front Pages" >>> or >>> whatever chapter heads are called in fancy books. I don't have chapters >>> at all, so I don't need pages that end in the middle before going on with >>> my text. I don't even indent paragraphs, but if I wanted to, it would be >>> no big deal to push the tab key. (Actually, most word-processors have a >>> format command that would do that for me, if I wanted it.) And since I >>> don't write books, or edit them or publish them, i don't need a desktop >>> publisher, which is what _I_ think OO/LO are aiming to be. >>> >>> On the other hand, if I needed a desktop publisher, and didn't want to >>> or could not afford to purchase a "professional" one, I would certainly >>> look at the possibility of learning and using OO/LO. From what I read >>> in these lists, that would be a real possibility. Someone who is willing >>> to >>> spend the time to actually write a book can probably afford the time to >>> learn desktop publishing. >>> >>> One more thing: I am not in any way trying to dissuade anyone from >>> learning OO/LO, if that's what they want. I am, however, pointing out >>> that it is hardly worth the effort for the average memo writer, letter >>> writer, or even article writer. It would be like a numismatist learning >>> metallurgy! >>> >>> I rest my case. >>> >>> --doug >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> List Conduct Guidelines: http://openoffice.apache.org/list-conduct.html >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >>> > > ------------------------------------------- > List Conduct Guidelines: http://openoffice.apache.org/list-conduct.html > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
