https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=150409
--- Comment #11 from Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > As with all topics around the UI Please think about Style Inspector again. It is *not* a "UI", it is an information tool. In it, the UI is its "plus" expansion buttons, its columns, etc. But the information in it is not a "UI" that you are talking about. It is the contents of the document, viewed from a different perspective. Besides that, the *user-side* benefits are: 1. Education about the true details of the document model, given to those who are interested in the details by definition (opening the tool indicates that). 2. Minimal surprise in cases like the mentioned bug 150406. 3. Performance of the tool (see below). >From developer's perspective, the benefits are: 1. Ease of implementation (having a complex check of the document contents to figure if the document does or does not contain relevant features); 2. Less probability of implementation errors (do we consider unused styles as document contents that warrant showing the CTL/CJK items?); 3. No need to parse the *whole* document to decide that, when you only have a small context (the cursor position). So - the claim that there is "no benefit" is plain wrong - the benefits are obvious (from both sides), and they only need to be compared (and IMO, the benefits of always showing are much greater from both perspectives - users' and developers'). Additionally: the current implementation was created *defensively*, in the process of the tool creation itself - without really taking target audience users' needs into account: we created that hiding functionality without allowing users to see what they miss, and decide if that made life better or worse for them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
