https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148597
--- Comment #12 from ajlittoz <[email protected]> --- (In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #11) > (In reply to ajlittoz from comment #10) > > > E# = category + category number > But this fails your consistency test. (-: I know. That's why I qualified your 3-descriptor proposal as "better". > My proposal with the Cs, is to introduce additional widgets in the Entry > tab, as part of the structure dialog, so that the user can control the > Category number and category label and caption text independently (and to > drop/move out that control from the "Type" tab). This is completely > separate from E# (which has to do with the Heading number that appears > before a caption, not caption labels). > > Have I misunderstood your point? > Partially, I think. I fully agree that the menu in the "Type" tab is wrong from UX point of view. It should be part of the structure line with adequate descriptors. I refrained from proposing more descriptors lest it would have been waved away with "too complex" or "breaks user experience" and tried to keep as much the existing. Read further down. I read bug 153561. If your (=TDF design team) intent is to "customize" the various descriptor in a more targeted meaning, then the "neutral" E (for _E_ntry I presume) can be changed as desired. > > ==> But what to do with the separator? Should it be included with E# or > > ignored, > In the "real" E# (in ToC), there is a dropdown box, which allows both > choices. > In my proposal, clicking on C# would provide a dialog with a dropdown box > like E# (where you can choose separator or not). In fact, the basic problem is with captioning. There is no agreed standard on caption structure. In Writer, a caption is defined as a paragraph containing a selected number range field. It is then implicitly assumed that what precedes the field is "Category" and what follows is "Caption text". I think that beyond this simple understanding there exists many other structures possibly exhibiting: - "decoration" around the number such as parentheses or square brackets (see "Separators" before and after in list styles, including chapter numbering) - a separator between category and its number and caption text; this separator is not necessarily a colon, nor a single character - order may be different from category-number-separator-text, which implies there may be 2 separators Captioning is essentially a manual process (Insert>Caption which is equivalent to macro execution does not change the issue because it leaves only text without any metadata markup). Writer has then no way of identifying the components, apart from the field. The present state of affairs relies on an implicit convention that category is written before (in reading order) the field and caption text after. A full control of "Table of xxx" formatting requires more contextual information than available today. Then should caption paragraphs be identified by some special means? Special markup? Then modification to ODF with all the fuss. Heading paragraphs are recognised as such when they are attached to some outline level. But I don't see any solution which would not upset the average user. Acceptability is of major importance. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
