Re: [PUSHED-3-5] Revert "Set the listbox height to an integer multiple of the listbox entry height"

2012-06-09 Thread Luke Symes
Hi, The problem I was trying to fix was that if a custom animation list item was part shown at the bottom of the list, then moving the item above it down one item would leave it part visible, when I felt that when an item was moved, it should stay fully visible. Please see attached image to see wh

Re: [PUSHED-3-5] Revert "Set the listbox height to an integer multiple of the listbox entry height"

2012-05-11 Thread Caolán McNamara
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 15:52 +0400, Ivan Timofeev wrote: > Hmm, maybe this is annoying. But what if we would just draw a border > around the control. See the attached image. Not so annoying now, right? I reckon you should go for it in the absence of any negative feedback. C.

Re: [PUSHED-3-5] Revert "Set the listbox height to an integer multiple of the listbox entry height"

2012-05-09 Thread Jean-Baptiste Faure
Hi, Le 09/05/2012 13:52, Ivan Timofeev a écrit : > [...] > > Opinions from the UX point of view? :) Do we really need to shrink a > listbox so that it does not show a partially visible item at the > bottom,[...]? A partially visible item at the bottom of a listbox, shows clearly that there is some

Re: [PUSHED-3-5] Revert "Set the listbox height to an integer multiple of the listbox entry height"

2012-05-09 Thread Ivan Timofeev
On 09.05.2012 15:06, Michael Meeks wrote: On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 22:55 +0400, Ivan Timofeev wrote: this patch reverts commit http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=16c9d63da67897e51960f3684d8d05b06f2c8f81 Quote: "This ensures that we don't get a half visible entry at the bottom

[PUSHED-3-5] Revert "Set the listbox height to an integer multiple of the listbox entry height"

2012-05-09 Thread Michael Meeks
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 22:55 +0400, Ivan Timofeev wrote: > this patch reverts commit > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=16c9d63da67897e51960f3684d8d05b06f2c8f81 > Quote: > "This ensures that we don't get a half visible entry at the bottom of > the view." I think Luk