https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Heiko Tietze changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|libreoffice-ux-advise@lists |so...@libreoffice.org
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #24 from Franklin Weng ---
(In reply to Khaled Hosny from comment #23)
>
> I suggest simply dropping the setting and keeping things as they are now.
> This is the default for new installations for some time now already and I
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #23 from Khaled Hosny ---
Hiding CTL or CJK font setting by default and having to expand them or switch
to a different tab is bad than status quo. Currently if I enable CTL and CJK
controls then all my font settings are visibl
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #22 from Tomaz Vajngerl ---
we can't use scroll bars however...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffi
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #21 from Heiko Tietze ---
Created attachment 143263
--> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=143263&action=edit
Mockup for comment 12
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #12)
> Tomaz pointed out in the d
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #20 from Mike Kaganski ---
(In reply to Khaled Hosny from comment #19)
+1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing lis
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #19 from Khaled Hosny ---
We should just remove the option that hides the CTL and CJK controls, and I
have always argued for that. i don’t buy the argument that this complicates
things for users who don’t use CTL or CJK script
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #18 from V Stuart Foote ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #17)
> Created attachment 143244 [details]
> A screenshot of a sidebar with sections
>
> (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #16)
>
> Sigh... I wrote:
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #17 from Mike Kaganski ---
Created attachment 143244
--> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=143244&action=edit
A screenshot of a sidebar with sections
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #16)
Sigh..
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #16 from V Stuart Foote ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #15)
> A tangential question: why don't we use expanding sections (with "+" beside
> heading, like in sidebar) in dialogs?
Well think we do on most dialogs,
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #15 from Mike Kaganski ---
A tangential question: why don't we use expanding sections (with "+" beside
heading, like in sidebar) in dialogs?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.__
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
V Stuart Foote changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu
--- Comm
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Thomas Lendo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||112139, 83066, 43808
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #12 from Heiko Tietze ---
Tomaz pointed out in the design meeting, that the character dialog depends on
this setting too. If only one is checked we have list boxes for font name,
weight, and size, while it's just a dropdown if
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #11 from Heiko Tietze ---
Created attachment 143002
--> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=143002&action=edit
Mockup for comment 10
Tomaz, Caolan what do you think?
Basically I removed "For the current do
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Heiko Tietze changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #9 from Toby Anderson ---
Or maybe the CTL options should just automatically become visible when a
document with CTL text is open. That's probably better.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #8 from Toby Anderson ---
I agree with Mike that my suggestion at the end of my previous comment is a bad
idea. It wasn't well thought through.
I'm now willing to concede that this isn't technically a bug but instead is a
usa
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #7 from Mike Kaganski ---
(In reply to Toby Anderson from comment #3)
> I suppose the expected behaviour would be that when that CTL checkbox is not
> checked then all CTL text in a document should be treated as western for th
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #6 from Mike Kaganski ---
Some errata/clarifications (sorry - I'm not a native English speaker):
presens -> presence
rwad -> read
was majority -> wast majority
"Personally I feel that those controls would better be removed t
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
--- Comment #5 from Mike Kaganski ---
Let me try to explain what you see.
To make LibreOffice UI less cluttered for users that don't need some of the
functionality (like people using exclusively Western writing systems, e.g.
English lang
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Buovjaga changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Toby Anderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|NOTA
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Mike Kaganski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Buovjaga changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEEDINFO
CC|
25 matches
Mail list logo
