Le mardi 11 juillet 2006 à 01:38 +0200, Erwin Rol a écrit : > > Hypothetically, if OOo in FC5 rendered differently than on Windows, would > > you consider it a bug or a problem if it were changed for FC6 to render > > closer (even identical) to Windows but this made it different from FC5 > > and earlier? > > I see a WYSIWYG word processor like a painting program. When I create a > painting with gimp, I expect it to look the same when I open it with > photoshop. Of course there might be tiny difference like photoshop might > use another JPG decoder and so maybe some pixels have a bit of a > difference. If i would not want this i should use another picture > format. The same with word processors, there might be some tiny > differences in how the font is rendered, but not like now that one page > fits about 5 lines less (that are than move to the next page). An office document is not a bitmap and the WYSIWYG part has always been more a best effort thing than a hard commitment. An office document is a set of construction rules. This is why you have individual hight-level components (characters) you can change later. Try that with a jpg where pixels are frozen and shapes are not shapes you can manipulate but collections of pixels. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
