It is not quite clear what the difference between 'Save as...' and 'Save copy as...' menu action is. The handbook says, in section 4.1, that Save as uses the document backend, while Save copy as does not. I am guessing this means that 'Save copy as' gives an exact, bit-for-bit, copy while 'Save as' can differ... However, I am not sure. Moreover, I think that for most users the presence of these two actions might be somewhat confusing and I think that the 'Save copy as...' action could be removed (after all, one can always use cp to copy a file, if one wants a bit-for-bit copy). Reproducible: Always
O.K., so I looked at the source code and it seems the situation is as I guessed. It also turns out that the 'Save Copy As' has a slight advantage over using plain cp in two cases: -- the file is a temporary file (since the user typically doesn't know its location) -- when the file was downloaded into a temporary file which was deleted ('Save Copy As' redownloads it). However, I still think that to a normal user the distinction between 'Save As' and 'Save Copy As' is not apparent and I don't really see the use-case for 'Save Copy As' (as opposed to 'Save As')
Well, "Save as" saves the document as, this might include changes and will most probably have a different file sha, tec. "Save Copy as" saves an exact copy of the file you opened. It seems a clear difference to me but i understand it, so that's always easier. I'll be happy to try to help with a better wording, but probably needs to come from someone that is not me since i know what it does so i don't really need an explanation to udnerstand it (not sure i'm making sense here :D)
How about: "Save as" ... saves the document under a new name including all the changes (annotations, form contents, etc.), provided the document backend supports saving changes. Note that, due to the way this is implemented, even if there are no changes to the file, the new file need not be an exact bit-for-bit copy of the original file (e.g. can have a different sha1 sum, etc.). "Save copy as" ... saves a copy of the original document under a new name (completely bypassing the document backend). The saved document will be a bit-for-bit copy of the original.
Burkhard, Yuri, what do you think?
No objections from me. Should I implement this as a review request?
Just commit it.
Git commit d6ea3e17f750f636b1c57790ddc33b9185fd2cf1 by Yuri Chornoivan. Committed on 21/07/2015 at 11:09. Pushed by yurchor into branch 'master'. Explain difference between 'Save as...' and 'Save copy as...' in the handbook M +7 -4 doc/index.docbook http://commits.kde.org/okular/d6ea3e17f750f636b1c57790ddc33b9185fd2cf1
I like this application, please don't misunderstand my post! I know this report is closed, and from my background I understand the explanations as you do. But: are you really convinced that not-so-much-tech people i) realize that there are two options, ii) are willing to look into the handbook when they ask themselves about the difference, iii) will be able to really understand it? I'm not. So I propose to involve the VDG and discuss usability with them! And btw, I'd expect these two options: "Save" and "Save As", as in always every other application, and nothing else - and if that's not the case it should be well explained, which doesn't mean having to look into a handbook but to have sensible names for these options (and maybe a good tooltip).
I have also been confused about the meaning of these options. I suggest: Save original as... Save changes as... where "Save changes as..." is greyed out unless there are changes. Even though "Save changes as..." is basically the behavior of "Save as..." in other programs, PDF viewers are not commonly thought of as editors, and some don't even support saving form changes, so I think it is important to be clear what is being saved.