[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #29 from Eyal Rozenberg  ---
(In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #28)

One is allowed to file an enhancement request dependent on a capability which
has been recognized as missing, and depend on it existing (which is why this
issue was marked NEW before you closed it). However - I'll let it go because:
1. This is a minor technicality and 2. The place to argue is indeed the main
bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

⁨خالد حسني⁩  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #28 from ⁨خالد حسني⁩  ---
You are still arguing in the wrong bug. Our UI does not present more than four
styles per family, so the issue here is to fix an issue that does not exist. If
you want our UI to show more than 4 style per family, then argue about that in
the relevant bug report, and when this is done (if ever) the issue here will be
relevant again.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #27 from Eyal Rozenberg  ---
(In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #26)
> (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #24)
> > (In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #23)
> > 
> > Khaled, with respect - you can certainly express the opinion that it's not
> > worth pursuing, but you can't "define-away" bugs. That goes even for
> > unconfirmed ones, and certainly for confirmed bugs with multiple dupe
> > reports and followers.
> 
> It is not an opinion, it is a fact. We don’t have more than 4 styles per
> family...

And that is a recongized bug, 35538. Fonts _do_ have more variants than
R/B/I/BI; so it's just that we semi-ignore that, and split the family into
multiple families. This is a bug, because we're claiming that font families
exist which simply do not. And ignoring or mis-representing aspects of a font
is a bug.

> If there are is no more than 4 styles per family, then the R/B/I/BI
> button are enough

It's not enough even then, for at least two reasons:

1. The weight of a font is not even a binary category. In CSS, for example,
font weight is a number ranging between 100 and 900 (although it seems to be
discrete in increments of 100), with "normal" being 400 and "bold" being 700.
In principle, a procedurally-drawn font can have its weight be a continuous
sequence with fractional values; and even if we don't go this far, the user
needs to be able to define styles with the level of boldness they want, to
effect a gradation; and when bug 127702 is resolved, the user would be able to
have a style saying "1 increment more bold than the underlying style" or "25%
more bold than the underlying style". That requires weight to be a numeric
category, not just another aspect of the variant.

2. Some fonts have an oblique variant rather than an italic one. IIANM (and I
may be wrong) we currently treat the former as the latter. If we don't do that,
we'll prevent people from using the Oblique variant. And both these behaviors
are problematic.

> If you want to have more than 4 styles per font family (which is a valid
> feature request, though I’d be inclined to close it as WONTFIX

It is not something that "I want". Fonts _do_ objectively have more than 4
variants; and we must support those. It's not a feature request of mine,  it
has been recognized that LO's lack of support for this is a bug, bug 35538.

> and keeping this issue open because we will need it once an unimplemented
> feature gets implemented makes no sense.

I mistakenly reopened  112973 instead of 35538, which is the one I meant to. If
33538 is open, which it is and should be unless a discussion has been held in
which people have been convinced it should be closed, then it makes sense for
this to remain open.

Again, sorry for the bug number mixup. The thing is, once a bug has been marked
NEW, people - even respected developers - can't just close it. They can argue
for closing it and consider the reactions.


2.  
plus, 
2.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #26 from ⁨خالد حسني⁩  ---
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #24)
> (In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #23)
> 
> Khaled, with respect - you can certainly express the opinion that it's not
> worth pursuing, but you can't "define-away" bugs. That goes even for
> unconfirmed ones, and certainly for confirmed bugs with multiple dupe
> reports and followers.

It is not an opinion, it is a fact. We don’t have more than 4 styles per family
on Windows and Linux, and on macOS that is a bug we have to fix (bug 105298).
If there are is no more than 4 styles per family, then the R/B/I/BI button are
enough and the issue here is not an issue and need to be closed. If you want to
have more than 4 styles per font family (which is a valid feature request,
though I’d be inclined to close it as WONTFIX, but that is different
discussion), this is not the issue to argue for it, and keeping this issue open
because we will need it once an unimplemented feature gets implemented makes no
sense.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #25 from Eyal Rozenberg  ---
(In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #23)

Oh, but I must apologize, I referred to the wrong bug in comment #21: bug 35538
is the one about the support for font variants other than R/B/I/BI, which I've
reopened.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Eyal Rozenberg  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|WONTFIX |---
 Status|RESOLVED|NEW

--- Comment #24 from Eyal Rozenberg  ---
(In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #23)

Khaled, with respect - you can certainly express the opinion that it's not
worth pursuing, but you can't "define-away" bugs. That goes even for
unconfirmed ones, and certainly for confirmed bugs with multiple dupe reports
and followers.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

⁨خالد حسني⁩  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #23 from ⁨خالد حسني⁩  ---
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #22)
> (In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #21)
> > We only support R/B/I/BI font family model for various legacy and
> > compatibility reasons
> 
> and that is a bug which must be fixed: bug 112973 (which I've just reopened).

No.


> > so such selection would be moot.
> 
> It won't.

It is.

> > Such Font "Foo", style "Black" will be actually showed as "Foo Black",
> > style "Regular".
> 
> ... which is a bug, since there is no "Foo Black" family, and we should
> certainly not duplicate the font families, nor make users believe that
> they're using a "Foo Black" family, which they might then expect to find in
> other applications.

No.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Eyal Rozenberg  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|WONTFIX |---
 Status|RESOLVED|NEW

--- Comment #22 from Eyal Rozenberg  ---
(In reply to ⁨خالد حسني⁩ from comment #21)
> We only support R/B/I/BI font family model for various legacy and
> compatibility reasons

and that is a bug which must be fixed: bug 112973 (which I've just reopened).

> so such selection would be moot.

It won't.

> Such Font "Foo", style "Black" will be actually showed as "Foo Black",
> style "Regular".

... which is a bug, since there is no "Foo Black" family, and we should
certainly not duplicate the font families, nor make users believe that they're
using a "Foo Black" family, which they might then expect to find in other
applications.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

⁨خالد حسني⁩  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||kha...@libreoffice.org
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #21 from ⁨خالد حسني⁩  ---
We only support R/B/I/BI font family model for various legacy and compatibility
reasons, so such selection would be moot. Font "Foo", style "Black" will be
actually showed as "Foo Black", style "Regular".

This is currently not the case on macOS, but that is a different bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #20 from Heiko Tietze  ---
(In reply to Mihkel Tõnnov from comment #19)
> Has the design team also discussed the proposed additional button, for
> accessing the styles beyond R/I/B/BI?

As stated in c17, the recommendation is to access attributes beyond RIB per
existing dropdown.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #19 from Mihkel Tõnnov  ---
Has the design team also discussed the proposed additional button, for
accessing the styles beyond R/I/B/BI?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Heiko Tietze  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|needsUXEval |
 CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |tietze.he...@gmail.com
   |.freedesktop.org|

--- Comment #18 from Heiko Tietze  ---
Removing UX as input has been given.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

--- Comment #17 from Heiko Tietze  ---
The design team discussed the various options of a) access to style variations
in submenus, b) splitting into two dropdowns similar to InDesign, and c)
indentation of the variations. All solutions are not easy to handle, and most
fonts have just R/B/I/BI that are addressed by the toggle buttons bold and
italic. Plus, we have the two dropdowns solution implemented in the character
dialog. So the recommendation is to 'ignore' variants meaning to collapse all
DejaVu fonts into one (regular).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Thomas Linard  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35
   ||538

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Adolfo Jayme  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

URL||https://alistapart.com/arti
   ||cle/user-interfaces-for-var
   ||iable-fonts

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Yousuf Philips (jay)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||102985


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102985
[Bug 102985] [META] Font bugs and enhancements
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 66792] UI: Better integration of font styles into the toolbar

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66792

Yousuf (Jay) Philips  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91
   ||130
Summary|UI ENHANCEMENT: Add a   |UI: Better integration of
   |drop-down toolbar button to |font styles into the
   |select font styles  |toolbar
 Whiteboard||needsDevEval topicUI

--- Comment #14 from Yousuf (Jay) Philips  ---
This bug report has 3 suggested improvements of integrating font styles into
the toolbar.

1) Create a separate font style drop down menu that lists font styles and keep
the current font name drop down menu exclusive to font families similar to
iWork Pages (OP description) and inDesign (comment 12). This would make the
toolbar similar to the controls in the font tab of character dialog, which
should be easy to implement, but would take up more room in the toolbar and
would be confusing to users who are used to having a single drop down menu for
everything, which is the default for most apps.

2) Change the font name drop down menu to only show font family names and have
a submenu that expands from each font family to select the font styles (comment
3). This would likely be more difficult to implement as we dont have any
implementation of a similar submenu in the combobox.

3) Change the font name drop down menu so that font style editions of a font
family are indented after the main entry (attachment 101991).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs