[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 149625] FORMATTING: Pasting a table cell, pastes the source cell in the upper/actual cell as an inner table cell
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149625 Eyal Rozenberg changed: What|Removed |Added CC||eyalr...@gmx.com --- Comment #22 from Eyal Rozenberg --- Someone please update regarding the status of this bug, which I can't reproduce with v7.6.0.3 and apparently other commenters as well. Is it completely gone? Does it occur in other cases? What's the ask right now? I'm confused. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156885] add toggle to show / hide authorship metadata in popup Calc comments
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156885 --- Comment #11 from Eyal Rozenberg --- My opinion: * Showing or hiding authorship metadata should indeed be toggle-able. * It should be off by default * The toggle should not be difficult to locate. Perhaps such a (global) toggle could appear even in the in-comment context menu. * We could very well consider such a toggle for other modules; the fact that they don't have a toggle is not a reason to avoid adding one in Calc (especially since it seems to matter more here) * It would be even better if the timestamp and the author could be toggled separately from each other. I might care about the date but know all comments are from just one person, for example. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156454] Indication of which table rows are considered heading rows is "hidden away" from the user
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156454 Eyal Rozenberg changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15 ||7024 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 157024] Table pseudo-styles ignore the number of table heading rows
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157024 Eyal Rozenberg changed: What|Removed |Added CC||heiko.tietze@documentfounda ||tion.org, ||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15 ||6454 Blocks||103100, 107553 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103100 [Bug 103100] [META] Writer table bugs https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107553 [Bug 107553] [META] Writer table styles bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 134980] Compare documents should recognize change of an image
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134980 Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org Keywords|needsDevAdvice |needsUXEval Summary|Compare documents doesn't |Compare documents should |recognize when image is |recognize change of an |changed |image --- Comment #10 from Dieter --- I take comment 8 as developer advice and think we should close bug as WONTFIX cc: Design team for final decision -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156925] Add a Color Scheme switcher to the Basic IDE
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156925 --- Comment #14 from Rafael Lima --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #13) > ...and challenging usability (how to explain users that you either > modify in a) or b) but only in case of...). I'll create the dialog Help page to document how this feature works and how it interacts with Application Colors. > Ultimately the doer decides. And if you consider to remove the patch later > once we have a better approach I'm not against this. I don't see any problem to change this approach if something better comes along in the future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156925] Add a Color Scheme switcher to the Basic IDE
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156925 --- Comment #13 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Rafael Lima from comment #11) > The main problem of creating all the machinery to allow the user to > edit/create color schemes is that the complexity of the patch will increase > 4x for something that very few people will use. Not necessarily. You could add color schemes where only the Basic IDE colors vary and remotely switch the option from "Automatic" to "Basic Foo". You could change the default values with the hard-coded values and maybe also hide the Basic IDE colors in the options. Point is that you introduce another route to customization and this adds up to the spaghettiness code-wise and challenging usability (how to explain users that you either modify in a) or b) but only in case of...). Ultimately the doer decides. And if you consider to remove the patch later once we have a better approach I'm not against this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156925] Add a Color Scheme switcher to the Basic IDE
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156925 Roman Kuznetsov <79045_79...@mail.ru> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||79045_79...@mail.ru Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Blocks||124891 --- Comment #12 from Roman Kuznetsov <79045_79...@mail.ru> --- Set to ASSIGNED by https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/155928 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124891 [Bug 124891] [META] Basic IDE bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 157006] UX review needed for Options - Writer - Compatibility dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157006 sdc.bla...@youmail.dk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||113944 CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13 ||1235 Keywords||needsUXEval --- Comment #1 from sdc.bla...@youmail.dk --- Relevant help page: https://help.libreoffice.org/24.2/en-US/text/shared/optionen/01041000.html Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113944 [Bug 113944] [META] Options dialog's Writer settings bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156925] Add a Color Scheme switcher to the Basic IDE
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156925 --- Comment #11 from Rafael Lima --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > "Me" is "one user", "a value" an example to illustrate why hard-coded > constants are odd. Sorry, I really hadn't understood. The main problem of creating all the machinery to allow the user to edit/create color schemes is that the complexity of the patch will increase 4x for something that very few people will use. I myself have never edited a color scheme... I only choose the one that fits better among the available ones. This is why I chose to prioritize having some presets. If the user really wants to edit the colors one by one, they can go to Toos - Options - Application Colors and edit them (and set Basic to "Use Application Colors" in the new dialog) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156549] New CAD features for cable design
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156549 Stéphane Guillou (stragu) changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard| QA:needsComment| Keywords||needsUXEval See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90 ||027 CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org, ||stephane.guillou@libreoffic ||e.org --- Comment #1 from Stéphane Guillou (stragu) --- Thanks for the report. There are quite a few requests in here, and it is easier to have a single feature request per ticket. But I'll try to answer: (In reply to Enrico Cora from comment #0) > Description: > For cable design > Is it possible add useful CAD features like ? There are dedicated CAD programs like https://librecad.org/, maybe they are more suited for the time being? In any case: > 1) Measures of lenghts for continuos and connected lines or arch (like > polilines in Autocad I draw and then I can have the total lenght) We have Dimension Lines currently, but that works for single lines and is not ideal to use if the user only wants to retrieve the length of one (multi)selection. Related question: https://ask.libreoffice.org/t/how-to-calculate-the-length-of-an-curve-in-libreoffice-draw-like-in-coreldraw/63780 With an answer suggesting the extension https://extensions.libreoffice.org/en/extensions/show/cadlo (which might cover other issues you have) Maybe this is already covered by bug 90027? I could imagine some info in the statusbar, but maybe a dedicated "Object stats" dialog could contain a variety of numbers, just like we have text document stats. > 2) Assign a descricptive name (as a bookmark for a group and this group has > associated proprierties such the lenght as indicated at point (1)) You can assign a name to objects and groups in the Navigator or with right-click > Name... > 3) Create an automatic BOM table report for all elements created at point 2 I think this is out of scope for Draw and should be only available in dedicated CAD software or through extensions like CADLO. > 4) For each group named (point 2) can be setted a specific that impact on > all sub-parts of group : >4.1) Color >4.2) Line thickness >4.3) Line Style >4.4) Layer assigned >4.5) Group visibility ON/OFF >4.6) Group printable ON/OFF It is possible to change line style, colour, etc. for the whole group, and to move it at once to a different layer with drag-and-drop onto the tab (see also bug 122587 for improvements to layers management). Visibility and printability is currently only at layer level, so that's the current workaround, but there are requests to extend such properties to objects, see e.g. bug 89831. In conclusion, in my opinion, I think what you ask for is either out of scope or already covered in other reports. Am I missing something? In any case, to be actionable, you should create more specific bug reports instead of a whishlist. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 122587] Moving Objects to a Different Layer
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122587 --- Comment #7 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Regina Henschel from comment #6) > ...a group can span objects of several layers. Now I remember the discussion. Two solutions come in mind: sme fancy vertical tree where objects have an assignment to layers and groups: Shape 1 Layer 1 / \ Group 1 \ Shape 2 / Layer 2 - Shape 3 - Group 2 (I guess this has limitations, is not easy to understand, and requires quite some effort to implement) Or a switch to show only one at a time: (o) Layer ( ) Groups v Page 1 v Layer 1 Shape 1 (Rectangle) Shape 2 (Circle) > Layer 2 > Page 2 ( ) Layer (o) Groups v Page 1 v Group 1 Shape 1 (Rectangle) v Group 2 Shape 2 (Circle) > Page 2 (Of course, we could also duplicate the objects and show both views in parallel underneath each other. But I think it bloats the tree too much.) (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #5) > Nevertheless, it would be nice to have alternative workflows. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 154051] Border transparency
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=154051 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEEDINFO --- Comment #3 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #2) > 1. When you want the entire table to be partially transparent > > 2. When the borders are thick, their total area can reach the area of one or > more cells, so it's not always "just a pixel here and there". Please share an example with is partially transparent table and a thick, non-semitransparent border that spoils the design and cannot be removed / become smaller. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156994] Can't have text area shape the same as the drawing object's area shape
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156994 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |heiko.tietze@documentfounda |.freedesktop.org|tion.org Keywords|needsUXEval | --- Comment #5 from Heiko Tietze --- Very little benefit versus huge effort. While Draw sometimes is used as DTP software I'd recommend to use better suited tools. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156994] Can't have text area shape the same as the drawing object's area shape
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156994 --- Comment #4 from Eyal Rozenberg --- (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #3) > Don't see much utility to an enhancement to bound draw object text boxes > with polygon or ellipsoid to match the object shapes. To say that, you need to refute my claim that this is the natural, and user-expected, behavior of text typed into a shape object. Otherwise - the current behavior is a bug, not an enhancement, and the utility of fixing it is that shapes would behave as expected and they should. > it > would be a substantial detriment to OOXML and MS Binary file > exchange/interoperability. Wwhen the user chooses to have a rectangular text area, that would be perfectly interoperable; and MSO files will open just fine in LO. Beyond this - you're essentially arguing we should not ever improve the feature set and behaviors supported in out document formats beyond what MSO offers, because doing that means hurting exchange/interoperability. > Dev effort Indeed, implementing this would require a non-trivial amount of developer effort, it is not a minor tweak. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156925] Add a Color Scheme switcher to the Basic IDE
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156925 --- Comment #10 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Rafael Lima from comment #9) > Feel free to edit the patch and change the color. "Me" is "one user", "a value" an example to illustrate why hard-coded constants are odd. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
