[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 133857] INSERT SECTION as LINK -- "remove section" is not what the term means, while a true "remove" option is also needed

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133857

--- Comment #6 from peter josvai <jepe at cspv.hu> ---
(In reply to Jean-Francois Nifenecker from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jean-Francois Nifenecker from comment #2)
> > I would like the underlying data to be removed when I ask for section
> > removal.
> > 
> > I guess this is just a question of vocabulary/language. Removing a section
> > is just that: removing
> 
> Gosh, I hit a button with a bad keystroke...
> 
> I guess this is just a question of vocabulary/language. Removing a section
> is just that: removing a section, NOT the data.
> Perhaps another option is due: removing a section AND its data?
> 
> Otherwise, I strongly oppose to data loss the OP asks for without the user
> being aware of it.

hi, 

I believe it is not about vocabulary, but operation...
I mean, there is something the user wants to do, she or he looks for an
operation
which a functionality will perform...

now, when inserting a section by LINKING a document...
what rises as a need in the user's head is to get what has been placed there
OFF...

bear in mind that it is inserted by LINKING, so, removing will not suggest
the deletion of the original document in any circumstance

to satisfy our linguistic ambitions :)
when we insert a section, two things happen in a sequence...
#1 a section is being created
#2 a document is being linked "into" that section ... 

so when we say remove, to think of removing the inserted text comes naturally
:)

REMOVE / DELETE / UNLINK are synonyms... as we know

when "delete" is used in this context as a title of the "button", one might
think of the deletion of a text... 
however, that would be stupid on that user's part, cause the text is LINKED
into the document... she or he linked it... not to mention leaving the
"protect" checkbox checked, too...
moreover, today's computers use recycle bins, so deleting something is not as
big a thing as it is in a Linux environment, when "rem" will delete stuff for
good :) 

anyway, whoever thinks that removing a link will cause deleting what's been
linked, is just overanxious... but will learn fast


PS:
my other argument would be that a section means a container and its content...
when someone sees a section and a button next to it: "remove"
she or he will very intuitively think that pressing that button will make 
that section disappear..
it is not linguistics, it is logic, that of the workflow...

the other option, which the user would expect, could be: "remove linking only"
("merge" linked text into the document)  
(merge sounds very good! part of it because "merge" is a verb which computer
users in general are pretty familiar with)


PS 2:
another argument could be that one sees a paragraph...
and there is a button next to it "remove"...
what the user will expect to happen in the case of hitting that button is
that the text disappears...
NOT that the text becomes merged to the previous and following paragraphs...

PS 3:
since the document is linked, the chances that any user will think that
removing the section will delete the linked document, I'd expect to be less
than 1%


sorry for the length

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-bugs/attachments/20200611/573431b3/attachment.htm>