https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145739
--- Comment #10 from Telesto <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #9) > (In reply to Telesto from comment #8) > > A) The table width should be below the table name (as currently). > The default alignment option sets the table width at 100% of the parent. > Before you configure anything about the width you need to change the > alignment. > Second argument to move the total width down is to have it together with the > column widths. That's indeed a valid point. > > B) The absolute/relative gets way to much focus... > Which again defines what you enter: either a width of 50% of the page size > with 25% spacing left and right, if alignment is Center, and column width at > 10%. Such a table definition might become handy when changing the page > orientation. I'm still feels wrong, somehow. Although I can't really pinpoint what bothers me. It's a 'trivial' setting regarding input unit in my perception. It's not actual table property. It's presented as a prominent able setting, IMHO. I'm not having an alternative, though. The only thing I can come up with is how certain input fields behave. Default being absolute. However allowing different input. Although 'converting' it like by fontsize input field. So 10cm being converted to points. But simply allowing % input. But yes, this is quite bad for discoverability. It shouldn't be required to read the help/or manual > > C) Regarding to column width: is only absolute allowed or maybe also > > relative sizes? > The idea would be to set column width in percent in case of a "(o) Relative" > position/size, of course. OK. I personally prefer the ability mix of absolute and relative. So not all absolute or relative. Like table width being defined absolute & column size relative. > > D) The part Left/Right between round brackets after From Start/From End > > appears to defying the purpose of using 'Start' and 'End', I think. > > E) Is Left/Right for spacing correct label for RTL language; so rather > > neutral? > > A while ago we considered this "Start (Left)" vs "Start (Right)" annotation > for users who might struggle with Start when looking for left alignment. I surely grasp the motivation. I'm also not familiar with start/end > I think this has been rejected meanwhile and we go with just Start/End. As for > the spacing I'd keep Left and Right but no strong opinion here. I have no actual knowledge about RTL. I'm happy with it as LTR user.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
