Re: Sort and copy results
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 01:29:24AM +0100, Wols Lists wrote: > If Word's autocorrect kicks in, that's considered a separate action from > what the user did, so if I mis-type then Word autocorrupts, the first > ctrl-z reverses the autocorrupt, and I need a second ctrl-z to undo what > I did. No need to go that far, Writer does the same. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 17:13 +0200, Kevin André wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Kohei Yoshida > > Just so you know, piggybacking on a thread and say "please fix my > > favorite bug I filed x years ago" is not appreciated. > > Sorry if I offended you. No offense was taken; I just did not appreciate it, wanted to express it partly because this happen more often than I'd like to see. > the > lack of separate undo for multiple steps (user input + > autocorrection). It's also not my favorite bug; I actually don't > really care much about it anymore since I it hasn't affected me in a > long time. But maybe there are other users like Wols who are still > running into this. The bug just seemed relevant to what Wols said, > that's why I mentioned it here. Understood. But then, the main topic of this thread is about Calc's sorting, so trying not to steer too much away from it would be appreciated. Best, Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 16:34 +0200, Kevin André wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Wols Lists wrote: >> > >> > That's one of my moans (maybe it's been fixed) about LO spellcheck! It's >> > too long ago to remember the details, and it was in a cell (can't >> > remember whether it was a Writer table or Calc). Anyways, I filled the >> > cell and tabbed away. The AutoCorrupt kicked in. And reversed >> > the ENTIRE operation, deleting the text I'd typed! I just *could* *not* >> > work out how to get LO to accept what I'd typed without insisting on >> > corrupting it. >> > >> > So it makes a lot of sense, in many circumstances, for a user's input to >> > be treated as multiple steps requiring multiple undos, even when it's >> > just one user action that triggers it. >> >> This. >> Please check out bug #36867 which I filed 3 years ago and still isn't fixed. > > Just so you know, piggybacking on a thread and say "please fix my > favorite bug I filed x years ago" is not appreciated. Sorry if I offended you. Reading about "AutoCorrupt" as written by Wols reminded me of this bug as it is about the very same subject: the lack of separate undo for multiple steps (user input + autocorrection). It's also not my favorite bug; I actually don't really care much about it anymore since I it hasn't affected me in a long time. But maybe there are other users like Wols who are still running into this. The bug just seemed relevant to what Wols said, that's why I mentioned it here. Regards, Kevin ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 16:34 +0200, Kevin André wrote: > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Wols Lists wrote: > > > > That's one of my moans (maybe it's been fixed) about LO spellcheck! It's > > too long ago to remember the details, and it was in a cell (can't > > remember whether it was a Writer table or Calc). Anyways, I filled the > > cell and tabbed away. The AutoCorrupt kicked in. And reversed > > the ENTIRE operation, deleting the text I'd typed! I just *could* *not* > > work out how to get LO to accept what I'd typed without insisting on > > corrupting it. > > > > So it makes a lot of sense, in many circumstances, for a user's input to > > be treated as multiple steps requiring multiple undos, even when it's > > just one user action that triggers it. > > This. > Please check out bug #36867 which I filed 3 years ago and still isn't fixed. Just so you know, piggybacking on a thread and say "please fix my favorite bug I filed x years ago" is not appreciated. As always, patches are welcome. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Wols Lists wrote: > > That's one of my moans (maybe it's been fixed) about LO spellcheck! It's > too long ago to remember the details, and it was in a cell (can't > remember whether it was a Writer table or Calc). Anyways, I filled the > cell and tabbed away. The AutoCorrupt kicked in. And reversed > the ENTIRE operation, deleting the text I'd typed! I just *could* *not* > work out how to get LO to accept what I'd typed without insisting on > corrupting it. > > So it makes a lot of sense, in many circumstances, for a user's input to > be treated as multiple steps requiring multiple undos, even when it's > just one user action that triggers it. This. Please check out bug #36867 which I filed 3 years ago and still isn't fixed. Kevin ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On 27/06/14 17:22, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 12:42 +0100, Wols Lists wrote: >> Why can't LibreOffice treat it as two separate steps, INCLUDING for >> things like undo? Treat the copy as one operation, then the sort as a >> second operation, and if you need to undo it then it's two , >> not one? > > I'll take this idea. I hope nobody will object to this. > Word does it (not that I consider Word a good example to copy from :-) If Word's autocorrect kicks in, that's considered a separate action from what the user did, so if I mis-type then Word autocorrupts, the first ctrl-z reverses the autocorrupt, and I need a second ctrl-z to undo what I did. Cheers, Wol ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 12:42 +0100, Wols Lists wrote: > Why can't LibreOffice treat it as two separate steps, INCLUDING for > things like undo? Treat the copy as one operation, then the sort as a > second operation, and if you need to undo it then it's two , > not one? I'll take this idea. I hope nobody will object to this. Thanks, Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On 06/06/14 12:27, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > Good. Now I have someone real I can ask. > > Can I ask in what use case this feature is used? Why does your use case > require that copying and sorting have to be done in one step, rather > than in two separate steps? Why can't LibreOffice treat it as two separate steps, INCLUDING for things like undo? Treat the copy as one operation, then the sort as a second operation, and if you need to undo it then it's two , not one? That's one of my moans (maybe it's been fixed) about LO spellcheck! It's too long ago to remember the details, and it was in a cell (can't remember whether it was a Writer table or Calc). Anyways, I filled the cell and tabbed away. The AutoCorrupt kicked in. And reversed the ENTIRE operation, deleting the text I'd typed! I just *could* *not* work out how to get LO to accept what I'd typed without insisting on corrupting it. So it makes a lot of sense, in many circumstances, for a user's input to be treated as multiple steps requiring multiple undos, even when it's just one user action that triggers it. Cheers, Wol ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 13:56 +0200, Winfried Donkers wrote: > Hi Kohei, > > > > Good. Now I have someone real I can ask. > > > Can I ask in what use case this feature is used? Why does your use > case require that copying and sorting have to be done in one step, > rather than in two separate steps? > > Well, we're talking of a company, I don't use it personally. > Often a one step action is preferred over a more than one step action. > (If it were te be removed, I would get a question to write a macro to > combine the steps to one action (press a toolbar button which invokes > the macro). That could be a solution for our specific company.) Ok. Thanks for your input. This helps. > And often the argument is that they were used to do it in a certain > way with Excel; this argument is _not_ a strong one for me. Understood. Although it's equivalent of long-time users of OOo/LibreOffice insisting that the things should stay the same (so that they don't have to learn new key strokes, mouse clicks etc). It's hard to change one's habits. In this particular case, Excel doesn't offer similar functionality, so it mostly concerns long-term Calc users. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
RE: Sort and copy results
Hi Kohei, > Good. Now I have someone real I can ask. > Can I ask in what use case this feature is used? Why does your use case > require that copying and sorting have to be done in one step, rather than in > two separate steps? Well, we're talking of a company, I don't use it personally. Often a one step action is preferred over a more than one step action. (If it were te be removed, I would get a question to write a macro to combine the steps to one action (press a toolbar button which invokes the macro). That could be a solution for our specific company.) And often the argument is that they were used to do it in a certain way with Excel; this argument is _not_ a strong one for me. > > And I would think that LibreOffice would aim to comply fully with ODF, even > > if that aim is never 100% reachable. > > (Making some features less prominent (as in hiding deep in the menu) > > because they are rarely used and have an awkward UI is fine for me.) > Now, it's important to point out that ODF specifies the content of a > document, not the features of an application that produces it. It's easy to > be ODF complient without implementing this specific "feature" (by handling it > during load and save). Let's not confuse this point. Clear. Winfried ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 07:50 +0200, Winfried Donkers wrote: > Hi Kohei, > > > > Yes. I'm almost certain that some enterprise users actually use this > > > feature. > > > I'd like to know they still exist though, rather than speculating that they > > still do. > > I hate to disappoint you, but the company I work with does. Good. Now I have someone real I can ask. Can I ask in what use case this feature is used? Why does your use case require that copying and sorting have to be done in one step, rather than in two separate steps? > And I would think that LibreOffice would aim to comply fully with ODF, even > if that aim is never 100% reachable. > (Making some features less prominent (as in hiding deep in the menu) because > they are rarely used and have an awkward UI is fine for me.) Now, it's important to point out that ODF specifies the content of a document, not the features of an application that produces it. It's easy to be ODF complient without implementing this specific "feature" (by handling it during load and save). Let's not confuse this point. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
RE: Sort and copy results
Hi Kohei, > > Yes. I'm almost certain that some enterprise users actually use this > > feature. > I'd like to know they still exist though, rather than speculating that they > still do. I hate to disappoint you, but the company I work with does. And I would think that LibreOffice would aim to comply fully with ODF, even if that aim is never 100% reachable. (Making some features less prominent (as in hiding deep in the menu) because they are rarely used and have an awkward UI is fine for me.) Winfried ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 19:54 -0400, Robinson Tryon wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Kohei Yoshida > wrote: > > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > > place. > > When we've deprecated/removed other features, how did we handle that > that in the Release Notes? Did we just make a note about the removal > and provide an alternate workflow? Good question. We really don't have a clear guideline on feature deprecation, but when we did, we did normally say it in the release notes, I think. Though in earlier days we may have skipped it since it was pretty much wild west back then. But if we did that today, we would include that in the release notes. > > >> > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. > > > > ... > > I'd like to know they still exist though, rather than speculating that > > they still do. > > Aside from clearly flagging this option as DEPRECATED in the UI and > then waiting a couple of versions before completely removing it, I'm > not sure of a great way for us to query our userbase. The enterprise > users might be even harder to query, as they might not see any changes > we make in 4.3 for quite some time. What *I* normally resort to is to either disable the UI or hide it, and see if someone reports it as a regression. I did that once for something else in the past (which it was argued that was still used in the "enterprise"). So far I haven't come across a bug report claiming it was gone. It was done several major versions ago IIRC. Either way, I really believe that we do have to be brave enough to deprecate some less than useful features if it makes sense, else we'd end up filled with tons of esoteric old-school features that nobody could ever maintain, or hinders our growth. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > place. When we've deprecated/removed other features, how did we handle that that in the Release Notes? Did we just make a note about the removal and provide an alternate workflow? >> > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. > > ... > I'd like to know they still exist though, rather than speculating that > they still do. Aside from clearly flagging this option as DEPRECATED in the UI and then waiting a couple of versions before completely removing it, I'm not sure of a great way for us to query our userbase. The enterprise users might be even harder to query, as they might not see any changes we make in 4.3 for quite some time. Cheers, --R -- Robinson Tryon LibreOffice Community Outreach Herald Senior QA Bug Wrangler The Document Foundation qu...@libreoffice.org ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 00:23 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote: > Hi Kohei, > > On Thursday, 2014-06-05 13:33:13 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > > place. > > > > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. > > It is even defined in ODF, table:target-range-address=...>, it is part of a > element, and if the source range is modified choosing menu Data -> > Refresh Range will update the target range with the current sorted data. Well, having it in ODF doesn't mean we need to implement it in the UI, if it's not good. > > The UI is a bit awkward, and not clear what the associated two fields > > (left drop-down and right input fields) are supposed to take. > > Left drop-down list has defined (DB) range names, right input field > takes the top-left cell address of the output range. Ok. Then this is probably one of the only fields that doesn't have a address picker button. That makes it more awkward. > > > Also, handling this option internally would require quite some extra > > effort, which, when one is trying to fix issues associted with this, > > would pose a greater risk of breaking things. > > > > Any objections for removing this? > > Yes. I'm almost certain that some enterprise users actually use this > feature. I'd like to know they still exist though, rather than speculating that they still do. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
Hi Kohei, On Thursday, 2014-06-05 13:33:13 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > place. > > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. It is even defined in ODF, , it is part of a element, and if the source range is modified choosing menu Data -> Refresh Range will update the target range with the current sorted data. > The UI is a bit awkward, and not clear what the associated two fields > (left drop-down and right input fields) are supposed to take. Left drop-down list has defined (DB) range names, right input field takes the top-left cell address of the output range. > Also, handling this option internally would require quite some extra > effort, which, when one is trying to fix issues associted with this, > would pose a greater risk of breaking things. > > Any objections for removing this? Yes. I'm almost certain that some enterprise users actually use this feature. Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken i18n transpositionizer. GPG key ID: 0x65632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 2D3A Support the FSFE, care about Free Software! https://fsfe.org/support/?erack pgp7O96MOiuji.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 17:20 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 22:52 +0200, Mat M wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Le Thu, 05 Jun 2014 19:33:13 +0200, Kohei Yoshida > > a écrit: > > > > > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > > > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > > > place. > > > > > > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. > > > > > > The UI is a bit awkward, and not clear what the associated two fields > > > (left drop-down and right input fields) are supposed to take. > > > > > > Also, handling this option internally would require quite some extra > > > effort, which, when one is trying to fix issues associted with this, > > > would pose a greater risk of breaking things. > > > > > > Any objections for removing this? > > > > > > Kohei > > > > Could we (well, huh, you ?) just copy the data first, then sort them > > in-place ? It will preserve the feature without causing effort to > > maintain. And we may even soften the UI by adding some labels to boxes. What I would be more interested to know is: would *you* (or anyone you know) personally miss this? Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 22:52 +0200, Mat M wrote: > Hello, > > Le Thu, 05 Jun 2014 19:33:13 +0200, Kohei Yoshida > a écrit: > > > In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted > > results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in > > place. > > > > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. > > > > The UI is a bit awkward, and not clear what the associated two fields > > (left drop-down and right input fields) are supposed to take. > > > > Also, handling this option internally would require quite some extra > > effort, which, when one is trying to fix issues associted with this, > > would pose a greater risk of breaking things. > > > > Any objections for removing this? > > > > Kohei > > Could we (well, huh, you ?) just copy the data first, then sort them > in-place ? It will preserve the feature without causing effort to > maintain. And we may even soften the UI by adding some labels to boxes. That's what we do today. However, that would be a pain (really pain) to support when you think of undo and redo, plus supporting reference update that's been requested for so many years. So, no. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
Hello, Le Thu, 05 Jun 2014 19:33:13 +0200, Kohei Yoshida a écrit: In Calc, you can go to Data -> Sort, and choose to copy the sorted results to someplace else, rather than the default option of sorting in place. I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got removed. The UI is a bit awkward, and not clear what the associated two fields (left drop-down and right input fields) are supposed to take. Also, handling this option internally would require quite some extra effort, which, when one is trying to fix issues associted with this, would pose a greater risk of breaking things. Any objections for removing this? Kohei Could we (well, huh, you ?) just copy the data first, then sort them in-place ? It will preserve the feature without causing effort to maintain. And we may even soften the UI by adding some labels to boxes. My 2 cents Mat M ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 21:57 +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > Kohei Yoshida wrote: > > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got > > removed. > > > Especially with Calc & Writer, it is a relatively safe bet that every > obscure feature is absolutely necessary for someone's workflow. Sure. But I'm in the mood for breaking someone's workflow. Kohei ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Sort and copy results
Kohei Yoshida wrote: > I'm just wondering if anyone would miss this feature if it got > removed. > Especially with Calc & Writer, it is a relatively safe bet that every obscure feature is absolutely necessary for someone's workflow. Just sayin, -- Thorsten signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
