https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153899
--- Comment #18 from Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #17) > (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #16) > > The merged state is - AFAIK and correct me if I'm wrong... > > You are wrong. Please read the documentation, try yourself, and follow the > comments here again I have, and I have, and I have, and it's all consistent with my assumption. For example, I I merge two cells with "a" and "b" respectively, or one cell with "ab" and an empty cell - with "move the contents to the first cell" - unmerging in both cases results in the first cell having "ab" and the second cell being empty. So the merge state does not seem to include how the merge was performed. > we provide an exceptional and outstanding feature. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. > (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #11) > > => NAB That's not an option IMNSHO. Users - most or nearly-all of them, I would argue - expect clone-formatting applied to a merged cell to format that entire area. And their expectation is perfectly justified. If they don't get a dialog for selecting the kind of action they want - then it has to be one of the two alternatives: Either format the broken-up cells, overwriting their pre-merge formats (Q1: No Q2: Yes); or don't break up the merged cell (Q1: Yes). The current behavior (Q1: No Q2: No) does absolutely not make sense and interrupts users' work, making them correct this gaffe of a behavior they did not want. If you're worried about the non-first cells' format not being re-applied on unmerge - then you should probably support the Q1-Yes option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
