https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168624
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Clark <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #9) > No, it's not. You're suggesting a change while the trichotomy is still in > effect - when users are forced to deal with it. A change which half-pretends > it does not exist is not an improvement with the current state of affairs. I'm not comfortable with the suggestion that we can only design away from the language trichotomy if we do everything in a single step. Even if I thought we could make any progress like that, it would be an enormous risk. This is a small area of the UI that most users don't interact with regularly. It seems quite safe to start experimenting with post-trichotomy UX here. We already know we will need this kind of configuration mechanism no matter what form our trichotomy replacement takes. More importantly, though, we have other non-trichotomy use cases that call for this sort of configuration mechanism. Even if we didn't do anything else with the language trichotomy, LO users would still see benefit from this change. > Don't know what you mean. Whenever I installed MS Office (which admittedly > is not recently), I did not install any language pack, but RTL-CTL worked. Your OS locale is likely en-IL, so that makes sense. I'd be interested to know if they installed other languages by default, or if they've just enabled RTL-CTL features as part of that English locale. > A complex multitude of harder-to-explain options. No, it's one option: a list of languages you want to use to write documents. And to reiterate, this replaces: a Western language; a CTL language; an Asian language; whether or not you want Asian typesetting features; and whether or not you want RTL typesetting features. (Note for users: Many Asian languages are actually Western, so make sure you search all of the dropdown menus carefully!) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
