[Bug 158588] ODT bloats in file size by factor 4 by saving without changes, font embedding options based on two checkboxes should be redesigned
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158588 OfficeUser changed: What|Removed |Added CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org Keywords||needsUXEval -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158587] Improve column/row highlighting in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158587 Buovjaga changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ilmari.lauhakangas@libreoff ||ice.org --- Comment #5 from Buovjaga --- So should the extra highlighting be deactivated in case multiple cells are selected? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 87078] Cross-reference dialogue in Sidebar
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87078 RGB changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rgb.m...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from RGB --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2) > [...] But before we start with a new UI wouldn't it make sense > to integrate the function into the navigator? For instance you right click > the headings entry that should be inserted and below the current options > (which should be removed by the way since none of them is not context > sensitive) would offer 'Insert cross-reference >' with 'Page', 'Chapter', > 'Reference' etc. below. > > Would that work? [...] Bug 36310 suggests a new "drag & drop mode" from the navigator to insert cross-references. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158587] Improve column/row highlighting in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158587 m.a.riosv changed: What|Removed |Added CC||miguelangelrv@libreoffice.o ||rg --- Comment #4 from m.a.riosv --- I'm with Ady -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158587] Improve column/row highlighting in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158587 --- Comment #3 from ady --- FWIW, the additional row+column highlighting is supposed to help in easier location of the cell that has the current focus. Expanding the extra row+column highlighting to cover every selected range might be counterproductive regarding the original goal of the feature. IMO, the new optional row+column highlighting should be relevant for cell's _focus_, not for range _selection_, which already has its own highlight, both on the cell/range itself and on the row/column headers. In the "simpler range" case, the "home" cell of the selection has its row+column highlighted, so the range is easily seen, not to mention it is all already highlighted by itself and at the row/column headers. What would be expected to be highlighted if there are several non-contiguous ranges selected? IMO, that would not be useful. BTW, as an additional help for users, the traditional Name Box shows the cell or range (either focused or selected). I'm not convinced that expanding the row+column highlighting to the entire selection would be an improvement; I'm worried it would be counterproductive. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158587] Improve column/row highlighting in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158587 Roman Kuznetsov <79045_79...@mail.ru> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158541] simplify start-center document selection
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158541 --- Comment #15 from V Stuart Foote --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #11) > More precisely: select per click (or arrow keys), open with double-click (or > enter). And hover just shows the usual tooltip if the cursor rests over the > control. And shows the pin icons to give a hint on the possibility. > > Any argument against this solution? (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #13) > (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #12) > > This workflow would become much more relevant, if (when) we add options to > the thumbnails: e.g., allow to use the same filter as last time (or redo the > type detection, as it happens now). Double-click is not the "workflow > complication" problem needing much attention - double-clicking is used > ~universally. > > +1 from me. OK so meaning, we move SC to single-click selection and double-click open? On mouse over still only exposes the tooltip, but does it continue to show the 75% transparent selection color? If so, +1 for implementing a on-mouse-over / single click / double click selection sequence cross platform for SC. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|libreoffice-b...@lists.free |samuel.mehrbrodt@allotropia |desktop.org |.de Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 --- Comment #5 from Commit Notification --- Samuel Mehrbrodt committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/8a2820193315e8f56a041153ca5578ce7bdcb832 tdf#158576 Require viewing the certificate It will be available in 24.2.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 Commit Notification changed: What|Removed |Added Whiteboard||target:24.2.0 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158541] simplify start-center document selection
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158541 --- Comment #14 from Buovjaga --- (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #13) > (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #12) > > This workflow would become much more relevant, if (when) we add options to > the thumbnails: e.g., allow to use the same filter as last time (or redo the > type detection, as it happens now). Double-click is not the "workflow > complication" problem needing much attention - double-clicking is used > ~universally. > > +1 from me. Very well. Onward to a new and glorious Start Center! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 148245] No way to use correct left/right page style automatically depending on the first page number
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148245 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |heiko.tietze@documentfounda |.freedesktop.org|tion.org Keywords|needsUXEval | Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEEDINFO Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Heiko Tietze --- The topic was on the agenda of the design meeting. Seems to me that we have plenty of options to control the page style. Whether H1 is assigned to "Left Page" (or "Odd Page") followed by Left/Right, or to "Right Page" - this works well. And is more or less easy to understand. The complications are hard to follow, and the question is what real use case requires this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158273] FORMCONTROLS Enhancement: Fill Cell with Text Box in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158273 --- Comment #8 from Dave --- I apologize for not communicating clearly. It is my first time making a suggestion to a program that I use daily and appreciate. The "symbolic" statement was not meant to be snarky, but an attempt to clarify that the point of Heiko Tietze was that the design of the suite due to whatever programming, practical, and/or popular use reasons was to pass the form to Base or Writer for final form processing before printing to .pdf (in my application). Which I am OK with, but the enhancement suggestion for me would work better. I have attached a graphic that reflects the idea that I proposed originally if that can be a help. I do not pretend to understand how things work, but the initial thinking expressed in this thread seems to indicate that it is a more complicated problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158273] FORMCONTROLS Enhancement: Fill Cell with Text Box in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158273 --- Comment #7 from Dave --- Created attachment 191291 --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=191291&action=edit Convert Cell to Text Box Possible insertion. Maybe there is a better graphic or function name? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158541] simplify start-center document selection
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158541 --- Comment #13 from Mike Kaganski --- (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #12) This workflow would become much more relevant, if (when) we add options to the thumbnails: e.g., allow to use the same filter as last time (or redo the type detection, as it happens now). Double-click is not the "workflow complication" problem needing much attention - double-clicking is used ~universally. +1 from me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158541] simplify start-center document selection
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158541 --- Comment #12 from Buovjaga --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #11) > More precisely: select per click (or arrow keys), open with double-click (or > enter). And hover just shows the usual tooltip if the cursor rests over the > control. And shows the pin icons to give a hint on the possibility. > > Any argument against this solution? I'm against this solution as it complicates the workflow. It's fine for template manager, but for the Start Center views it is irrelevant as there is no multiselection. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 --- Comment #4 from Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #3) > (In reply to Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) from comment #2) > > That wouldn't help with Macro security mode "High" where only macros from > > trusted sources are allowed to run. > > High or Very High... you need to _always_ trust the certificate and my > proposal was to "trust" it only once. Please read the description of the macro security level in the options dialog. What you describe only works in Medium level. > Showing the certificate in the dialog is a bit odd. We could change the > "Enable" action into "Verify certificate" which would open the respective > dialog. Yeah, or just show the relevant information in the dialog (and highlight if something looks weird if that's possible). Most users don't really know how to interpret the ceritificate dialog. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 --- Comment #3 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) from comment #2) > That wouldn't help with Macro security mode "High" where only macros from > trusted sources are allowed to run. High or Very High... you need to _always_ trust the certificate and my proposal was to "trust" it only once. Showing the certificate in the dialog is a bit odd. We could change the "Enable" action into "Verify certificate" which would open the respective dialog. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 133836] Autofilter enables deselect items automatically when typing a search
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133836 --- Comment #31 from Heiko Tietze --- We discussed it again yesterday and the idea was born to go with a "sticky" workflow. We add a toggle button next to the "[/] All" checkbox that makes the current selection sticky (indicated by a disabled state and ideally also separated with a horizontal ruler). Those items wont be affected by any search. Everything else remains as it is. Workflow would be to search for "lor", which filters the list to "lorem, lorum, lorim" and have them checked, to press the sticky button which makes these items disabled, search for "ips" returning in addition to the sticky and disabled items "ipsum, ipsen, ipsan", all checked. It should be possible to untoogle the sticky button, which keeps the current result but enables all items. User could then deselect "lorim, ipsan", toggle sticky on again, and search for "dolor". Sounds flexible and easy to understand as well as simple to implement. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 --- Comment #2 from Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1) > Does it help if one can enable the macro/s without always trusting the > certificate? In other words to have the button "Enable Macros" always > enabled. That wouldn't help with Macro security mode "High" where only macros from trusted sources are allowed to run. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158273] FORMCONTROLS Enhancement: Fill Cell with Text Box in Calc
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158273 --- Comment #6 from Heiko Tietze --- (In reply to Dave from comment #5) > In other words, the form creation tools within Calc are more symbolic... Take my advice as an alternative workflow. What do you suggest to do? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||105605 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105605 [Bug 105605] [META] Digital signatures bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158541] simplify start-center document selection
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158541 --- Comment #11 from Heiko Tietze --- More precisely: select per click (or arrow keys), open with double-click (or enter). And hover just shows the usual tooltip if the cursor rests over the control. And shows the pin icons to give a hint on the possibility. Any argument against this solution? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 --- Comment #1 from Heiko Tietze --- Does it help if one can enable the macro/s without always trusting the certificate? In other words to have the button "Enable Macros" always enabled. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158576] Improve macro signature confirmation dialog
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158576 Samuel Mehrbrodt (allotropia) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists ||.freedesktop.org Keywords||needsUXEval -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158394] Automatic scaling of icons for navigation bar
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158394 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |heiko.tietze@documentfounda |.freedesktop.org|tion.org Keywords|needsUXEval | --- Comment #4 from Heiko Tietze --- We discussed the topic in the design meeting. A potential workflow is that users start a windowed presentation and maximize this window later, which requires an adaptive icon size. So option 2) is the best. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158290] "Formattings" should be used instead of "Formats" in some cases
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158290 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Blocks||115596 --- Comment #7 from Heiko Tietze --- We discussed the topic in the design meeting. As comment 3 points out, the distinction is rather technical. And the term is used in MSO as well, so familiar to users. In the end it's up to translators to find a fitting localization. => NAB Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115596 [Bug 115596] [META] Labels of UNO commands bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158291] The term "Field Shadings" is confusing
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158291 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||115596 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115596 [Bug 115596] [META] Labels of UNO commands bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 158291] The term "Field Shadings" is confusing
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158291 Heiko Tietze changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Heiko Tietze --- We discussed the topic in the design meeting. Some ideas have been discussed here, Field Highlighting could be another option. However, the term shading is known in MSO (Character Shading) and we think the effort does not justify the benefit. Neither the need to learn a different word for users. => NAB -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
