[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 156927] Folding of ToC in Writer

2023-08-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156927

Timur  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #3 from Timur  ---
Thanks, Jim. 
I assume we may put this to Wont Fix for folding of default ToC. 
If not so, anyone is free to reopen this.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 156927] Folding of ToC in Writer

2023-08-25 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156927

--- Comment #2 from Jim Raykowski  ---
I think Contents 1-10 paragraph styles normally have their parent style as the
Index paragraph style and have outline level none. In this document, paragraph
styles Contents 1-4 have Default Paragraph Style as their parent. Content 1 has
outline level 3, Content 3 has outline level 1, Content 2 and 4 have outline
level none. So:

(In reply to Timur from comment #0)
> 1. Is folding normally possible in ToC? Why not? Would be nice to be able to
> fold all sublevels of selected heading.
I would say folding is not normally possible in ToC since normally Contents
1-10 have an outline level none. Bug 156282 maybe addresses folding all
sublevels of a selected heading.
> 2. Why folding is possible here?
Folding is possible because paragraph styles Contents 1 and 3 have an outline
level set other than none.
> 3. Why it works for document level 1 and 2 headings, which are not correct
> contents style level 1 headings, and stops at level 3 which is really level
> 1 contents.
I hope the explanations for questions 1 and 2 answer question 3.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 156927] Folding of ToC in Writer

2023-08-25 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156927

Aron Budea  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rayk...@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Aron Budea  ---
Jim, since you implemented the feature, could you please add some insight here?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.