https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153106
--- Comment #21 from ady <adylo811...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #20) > There are (at least) two usability considerations/problems regarding comment > indications: > > 1. On one hand, it's a problem when comment indicators hide content. > 2. On the other hand, it's a problem if comment indicators are not > clearly-visible, as I might inadvertently miss them > > Bug 91415 was opened regarding the first usability problem, not the second > one. Also, bug 91415 did not ask for any changes at high zoom levels - it > regarded the situation without playing with the zoom level. That sounds as if the request explicitly said "I cannot use the zoom feature to solve this" or "I have "X" problem with the zoom feature, so it doesn't help in my case". The reason users do not mention zoom in bug 91415 is because they are simply not aware that the zoom feature resolves the problem. I explained this several times already. There is no physical way to _simultaneously_ see more details and to see "the big picture" in the same UI. That's the reason to use zoom. Quote: -- -- I could take almost any cell, with a clear visible text and indicator, scale the zoom factor to, say, 20%, and show how it is an inconvenience. The opposite is also true: use a higher zoom factor and the interference goes away. -- -- Please re-read that quote and think about it. The solution to the non-issue in bug 91415 is to use a feature that already exists. Some users are not aware of its existence, that's all. In a similar way, a user may just ask "is it possible for Calc to give me the results that I need without having to learn anything about functions, whatever that may be? I don't want to learn about functions and formulas." Well, the answer would be "no, you have to learn how to use the available features". Generally speaking, there are 2 kinds of popular zoom methods: either you zoom in/out using the same window, or you have an additional small window where some area around the mouse pointer is expanded. The goal: either users want to see more details (zoom in), or want to see a "the bigger picture" (zoom out). When you scale the comment indicator, you are maintaining the ratio (or using a similar ratio) between the content of the cell and the indicator. As I explained at length already, this doesn't solve the original problem, while it adds inconvenience to other users (such as visually challenged users that already use the zoom features of both, Calc and the OS). > > The patch introduced in 91415#c1 did two things: Replace the square with a > triangle, and scale the triangle during zoom. > > The first change is relevant to that bug. I don't see how the second change > is relevant. While I may personally "like" the scaled comment indicators' > look - such a change does not IMHO belong on that bug. So I agree that that > part be backed out for now. > > Heiko, or someone else, should open a separate bug to discuss whether or not > comment indicators should scale. > > Having said that... Ady, the images you attached here do not serve your case > well enough. The 7.6 examples, with the scaling, do not exhibit hiding of > cell contents. Could you replace the screenshots with cases which are > actually problematic? In bug 91415, we got a link to > https://i.imgur.com/3Ejqm9t.png - which shows very problematic content > hiding. How bad is the situation now? I already offered the possibility to attach the result of the same screenshot while using 10 or 20% of zoom factor in Calc, to make it more evident. Have you noticed that the picture in bug doesn't show the zoom factor? Let me mention, again, other things that could trigger the same visual problem: * the row's height is too small in relation to the font size; * the width of the column is too narrow, so not all the text gets into the cell. There are several possibilities to solve those 2 issues, and they both are not letting the content be seen clearly. At some point, users need to learn how to change the size of the cell, or the size of the font, or to change the zoom factor. That's how users resolve that problem. What about the "###" error? Users can: * expand the column width; and/or, * change the font type; and/or, * change the font size; and/or, * use a different alignment; and/or * change the zoom factor. All of these have some influence on whether the "###" is seen. A user could report "I changed the column width, I then saw the content of the cell, but then the problem returned again". I would answer "have you changed the font type and/or size, or the zoom factor? Please find the combination that fits your needs." > > Also, Ady, > > > You should be able to read and work with Calc without distraction from the > > indicator > > I disagree with that. On the contrary, I see it as a problem if the comment > indicator does not draw your attention. Yes, if that were to be a problem. There is no report claiming that the comment indicator cannot be seen. The user should be able to see it, but it should not be "the main thing"; that would be distracting. Again we are talking about a non-issue. You all know the expression "RTFM". Just as we reply in so many "bug reports", in this case the answer should had been a link to a help page explaining how to use the zoom feature in Calc. Oh, that's the problem! It did not exist :-o, and no one replied anything about its existence. Well, it just happens to be that visually challenged users are more aware of this feature, that's all. BTW, by now there is such bug report, requesting that such help page would be created. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
