https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149602
Telesto <tele...@surfxs.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sdc.bla...@youmail.dk
--- Comment #4 from Telesto <tele...@surfxs.nl> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Telesto from comment #0)
> > Expected Results:
> > Moving relative to anchoring position
>
> Absolutely wrong. Expected result is that it must be positioned according to
> the *positioning* defined for the object, where anchoring *may* play *some*
> role. See FAQ [1] (that you had been pointed to several times already, so it
> is very confusing why this misunderstanding issue arises again and again -
> can you point what should be improved in the explanation?).
The wiki might have been pointed out to me, but I don't recall. Why is there an
wiki next to help? And well the wiki topic very broad, about all types of
anchoring.
> Specifically here: the vertical *positioning* of the objects is N cm *from
> top* to "Margin", which means "to entire paragraph area" (this is handled in
> tdf#149252). So your blue rectangle object must be put 1.11 cm under the top
> edge of the *current* paragraph (e.g., *inside* which the anchor is
> located). So anchor has *some* effect here - it specifies which paragraph
> will be taken into account - but otherwise, the positioning rule does not
> care where exactly in the paragraph the anchor is (but for other positioning
> rules, like "Center" to "Character", it would matter).
>
> The separation between anchoring and positioning allows for great
> flexibility. This is not a bug.
If I had positioned those shapes by using of the position and size dialog it
might occurred to me
Yes, and should have looked at the position and size dialog after the
surprising effect)
So bottom line: image position is based on the entire paragraph (default
setting), regardless of the position of the 'to character' anchor. I kind of
guessed it would relative to the position of the anchor (but that's totally
wrong, my mistake)
Still: In the case here a merge (fusion) of paragraphs occurred. The reference
location changes. Applying Paragraph Position used at paragraph 2, one to one,
on paragraph 1.. sounds bit silly.
It's technically expected, from user perspective pretty unexpected, IMHO)
I kind of expected that on merge of the paragraphs, the position would be
corrected. So the current position of the shape in reference to paragraph 1
would be measured. The values from left/ from top being adapted (to reflect the
change situation on screen). Preventing shapes flying around to a "random"
place (from user perspective)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
