https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=142446

--- Comment #22 from Jim Raykowski <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to j.a.swami from comment #20)
> 2. When I issue a command that content should be expanded to more levels,
> the system sometimes responds a bit slowly. The lag is long enough to create
> uncertainty as to whether the command has been recognized or not.
Yes, for large files there can be significant delay when a large amount of
layout frames need to be remade. Are you testing with a full debug build or
perhaps a container version? These will have slower layout. 

> 3. It seems that specifying a content level greater than 3 has an
> inconsistent effect. Sometimes specifying "4" shows me level 4, sometimes
> not.
I haven't been able to repro this. Could you supply the steps to repro and
attach a test file that this happens?  

> 4. When content is collapsed to a certain level, I would have expected to
> see the "no-level" content beneath that level collapsed, consistently.
> Instead, it seems, such content is always shown, unless already collapsed
> manually with "toggle outline folding." This seems to me a less-desirable
> approach. 
>
> Imagine, for example, that I have a several-page hieararchical document,
> with some of the "no-level content" extending for several paragraphs (or
> even pages). Using "Show outline content to level" may or may not show me
> the actual bare-bones outline, depending on what I've previously done.
> 
> If I have previously collapsed some NL content but not all, expanding or
> contracting the outline will show me that NL content accordingly, in a
> manner that would seem to me inconsistent. That is, it would be consistent
> with my previous actions but inconsistent with what I'm now trying to do,
> namely view the whole outline at a certain level.
But doing this seems like it would make the feature just an on canvas copy of
what the Navigator Headings already does, which is, shows the actual bare-bones
outline.

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

Reply via email to