https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160273
--- Comment #5 from Csábi Frigyes <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Stéphane Guillou (stragu) from comment #4) > (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #2) > > You are mixing Table/Table Cell *text orientation* up with Character *text > > rotation*. > > > > Different attributes! > > > > Table layout BTLR is different to TBRL -- the 90 left rotation happens to > > match the layout of the BTLR orientation. Simply put, the 270 right > > rotation does not match layout of TBRL orientation. > > > > IMHO => NAB > I agree with Stuart here. Character rotation is a character effect, not a > whole-paragraph or whole-cell tool. > > (In reply to Csábi Frigyes from comment #3) > > Hmm, yes you are right, the 270 rotation is still left to right. My problem > > is, that it is very hard to read. And if i try to change it to right to left > > (Ctrl + Shift + D in Windows) it messes up the text. Would you consider this > > as a bug? > Why would you change an LTR script to RTL direction? In this case, the > character rotation and the writing direction features would be both > missused. If you want the text contained in a table cell to be read by > tilting your head to the right, cell rotation has to be used. What is wrong > with using cell rotation? Yes, using cell rotation would be the more convenient, but it raises a problem mentioned in Bug 160271, which seems to be considered NAB. Not to mention another issue. We have to work with merged AND rotated cells, and they dont break "well" when they continue on multiple pages, leaving sometimes half of the page empty (Even with allowing row breaking). Rotating the text instead of the cell fixes this as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
