On Friday 09 February 2007 11:31, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software Engineer -
Sun Microsystems wrote:
> ODF lists defined by using list blocks - <text:list> elements:
> - Each top-most list block denotes a certain list and defines the
> counter domain for its including list items and sub lists.
ok
> The list
> style, which will be applied to this list, can define start values for
> each list level.
I don't agree to that.
A child list has its own style which can specify the start value. The child
list-style may be inherited from the parent.
This means that your statement is only true for some cases (when the child
list does not have a list-style) but not for all.
> - Each list block restarts the counter of the list level, the list
> block belongs to.
Could you explain this? This is not a full English sentence.
> - Each list block can have its own list style and the complete list
> level definitions of this list style are applied to its list items.
> E.g., a list block on list level 3 defines an own list style containing
> list level definitions for list level 2 and 3. Thus, these list level
> definitions are used, if needed, to build the list label of its list
> items and to layout its list items.
Hmm, you sure?
So you actually think we should have
1. head
a.a head 2
if the list-level 2 has a different definition for the level 1?
Who would want that?
No, I think that if the level 3 uses a list-style thats different from the
other levels then that is used for the formatting (character style) and the
counter, but if it shows counters from parent list-styles then they should be
inherited from the parent style without change.
So;
1. Head
1. a Head2
where the head2 is build up from:
* "1." the counter inherited from the parent item. The counter-style, start
value and prefix/suffix are inherited as well.
* "a" the local style determines the counter style and the start value,
prefix suffix.
* "Head 2" the parag text.
> - Each list item can restart the counter of its list level with a
> certain value.
ok
> - Each list item can override the defined list style of its list block
> by the new text:style-override attribute. The complete list level
> definitions of the overriding list style is used to override the
> definitions of the overriden list style. If the overriding list style
> only contains the definition for one list level, only the list level
> definition of this list level is overriden. Thus, the list style, which
> is applied to the list item is a somehow a list style, which is formed
> by taking the list style of the list block overriden by the attributes
> and elements of the list style given in the text:style-override attribute.
Please write shorter sentences, your writing gives me a headace. ;)
If I understand correctly this is the same as 2 points back. Which I disagree
with. I do think that we brought up that topic a couple of times on this
list in the last month as well.
Reusing the text from the parent list was the concensus.
> - A list block can also continue the numbering of its preceding list
> block without restart by using attribute text:continue-numbering - see
> chapter 4.3.1 of ODF specification 1.1 about list blocks.
Yeah, I read that but still am quite at a loss as how to interpret it.
Can you perhaps give a (useful) example?
When I read it I thought that this was an indication that the list was not
properly created. If you want to continue numbering, then merge the lists.
That's why we have both the text:list hierarchy (which makes up a whole list)
and the numbered-paragraph with a list-id. Both make it clear that a set of
paragraphs together make a list, and thus should have consecutive numbering.
I.e. I don't see a reason to have a feature that allows you to combine
separate lists into one when you could just do exactly that; by combining
different paragraphs into a list.
> For sub lists
> everything is clear. But for top-most list blocks I want to extend the
> ODF specification: The current specification states, that the numbering
> is only continued, if the preceding list has the same list style. I want
> to apply this statement not only to the direct preceding list, but any
> preceding list. Thus, if text:continue-numbering is true, the numbering
> of a preceding list, which has the same list style applied, is continued.
> Use case: Think of a list with 3 list items, each list item containing a
> couple of paragraphs. In the paragraphs of the second list item you now
> insert a small enumeration using a bullet list. Now, your list is broken
> into two parts by the bullet list. To "join" these parts together to one
> list, you can now use the text:continue-numbering attribute.
I think this is false.
This just indicates that you should not have used a text:list structure for
the non-continues list, but you should have used numbered-paragraphs for the
3 list items.
On top of that; your example doesn't actually need the proposed extention. It
would work fine with the current continue. Wouldn't it?
--
Thomas Zander
