[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 48622] Line thickness specification - too many choices, nonintuitive

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48622

--- Comment #20 from Heiko Tietze <heiko.tietze at documentfoundation.org> ---
Created attachment 175530
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=175530&action=edit
Screenshot

That's how it looks: hairline, thin, medium, thick, extra tick line width for
the borders around paragraphs. It nicely picks up "thin" for some of the
predefined table styles, and Calc also uses this as defaults for cell borders.
Any other value would be "Custom" with the spin edit as of today.

The patch affects only borders and not the width of ordinary lines. So we still
get a large list in the sidebar with 0.5/0.8/1.0/1.5/2.3/3.0/4.5/6.0/+. Other
line width selections are done with spin edits, AFAIK.

The hairline discussion was done in bug 99027. The value of 0.05 means 1px for
all devices (see c4). Would summarize the discussion as: 0.05 is good for
screens while (low-resolution) printer benefit from thicker borders.
(The "Default" table style uses 0.5pt, "None" - used when going through the
menu - 0.05pt).

MSO2016 lists fractions ¼, ½, ¾, 1, 1½, 2¼, 3, 4½, 6pt (I don't see any
difference before 1pt). My source might not be up to date.

My take: real hairlines are relevant and we should have 0.05pt in the list.
Defaulting to 0.5pt sounds good to me. Wouldn't follow MSO but rather go with
0.05 (hairline), 0.5 (thin), 1 (medium), 2 (thick) and 4 (extra thick). We
should also use these values (plus the last custom) for ordinary lines.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.