https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90374
--- Comment #8 from Jay Philips <[email protected]> --- Created attachment 115094 --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=115094&action=edit sidebar tabs cropped (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #7) > Created attachment 115092 [details] > indicator when drag resizing Deck is about to collapse closed > > Behavior now is that while we drag the Deck's width narrower at a point the > GUI switches to a close action for the Deck--a Right pointing arrow > appears--and release of the drag colapses the deck. That behaviour doesnt happen for the Properties or Manage Changes tabs. > This complements action of a click on the current Tabbar button which > collapses the deck for the current content panel(s), or if a different > Tabbar button will toggle the Deck to that tab's content panels(s). Dont forget the 'X' button in the title bar. :D > The full collapse of the Deck with a click on its Tabbar button seems > correct UI/UX. > > A drag resize to minimum size -> then collapse (looks to transition when > last widget of the specific content panel(s) open has been obscured) also > seems correct -- reopening of deck to that same content panel opens it to a > "minimum width", for that content panel. And changing the Deck to one of the > other Content panel(s) with a Tabbar click retains the prior "minimum width". Is there a point to be able to shrinking down the width of a tab so that the controls start to disappear, similar to the attached image. > The Navigator and Manage Changes content panels seem to incorrectly not > allow resize of the deck to point of colapse, but they do honor the "minimum > width" if set from another content panel active in the Deck. I was able to resize Navigator to the point of collapse. I find the resize of the deck to point of collapse to be quite useless. Other office suites that implement sidebars dont have such functionality (calligra, iworks, wps/kingsoft). > All that being said, the current configuration of allowing both a "minimum > width" (e.g. last fully exposed widget) prior to collapse of the Deck, and a > "maximum width" independently for each Content panel continues to make > sense. Especially if we are able to improve function of the Sidebar with > per-user customization of bug 67770, and the other issues of comment 1. > > So NO, would not agree to a single minimum width applied to Decks of "all" > content panels--but that said, there is room to improve how each decks > minimum width (prior to collapse) is determined. So you wouldnt agree to a single minimum width for all but you'd agree to having independent minimum widths per deck, right? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
