[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 135871] Highlighting no fill is not the same as no fill; there is still direct formatting present according to paragraph style

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135871

--- Comment #14 from Telesto <telesto at surfxs.nl> ---
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #9)
> (In reply to Telesto from comment #8)
> 
> "I'm not asking for hundreds (or thousands of tools). I'm only taking about
> this function. And that function. And also that one. And this. And I don't
> realize that that is just my list of favorites, and others have different
> lists; and also many have consistency in mind; so having *some* set of tools
> to reset special DF, the question arises to make other DF to have those
> counterparts, too. And I have that delusion that I can create a workflow
> "using styles", where DF fits."

I know.. something about unwanted scrolling comes to mind ;-). Where this
happened, and surely not the first time.. 

So I understand the 'objection';

> And too often I see people here have ideas like "I see
> this small problem, and I have this great idea, and I am sure it's nice to
> have, and I don't want to learn to see the whole picture, to see that this
> local solution would maybe allow some specific thing, but in the expense of
> much greater problems, not only because of much greater complexity in the
> software and maintenance, but also promoting not what I think it will (using
> styles), but a different and very problematic - using DF

There are misunderstandings & different idea's for sure. I surely assume my
idea being THE solution. Only an attempt/direction. 

However the first task is the identify if there is a problem; and what the
problem is or the problems are. 

I'm don't what push something through. But I can't be rather persistent if I
have the impression something is not right. The usage of styles is not that
easy as it in my perception could be, IMHO


(In reply to Luke Kendall from comment #11)
> The DF commands that appear to toggle, don't - I think that's the major
> source of the problems caused by the design of DF in Writer.  When you have
> used DF to change back to the default appearance, the text is still DF.
> That's the heart of the problem.

That's indeed the heart of the problem (related to the toggle buttons as bold).
Same issue exists also for font color/font highlighting


---

To start with; there are number of combinations possible
1) Direct formatting only
2) Paragraph style + Direct Formatting
3) Paragraph style + character style
4) Paragraph style + character style + direct formatting

--

Quote: "There's no efficient workflow that includes both DF and styles, not
because there are no "reset specific DF" tool, but because they are just
ideologically mutually exclusive."

In pure form there might 'exclusive'. But practical this isn't true. Two
paradigms/ ideology's a entangled in the GUI and functionality

For me it's floating scale.. Not exclusive paradigms. You can apply DF to a
paragraph style. There is always a paragraph style (the default paragraph
style); even if ignore that fact and use DF for formatting only.

In the past I used Heading (style) for numbering, and never cared about other
styles (so used Default style with maybe DF). And limited to use for PS to
headings style. And I lived.

Working with paragraph styles + direct formatting is pretty
conformable/practical for me. As being easy/ prominent accessible. And not
seeing the benefit of Character Styles. Maybe even quite cumbersome to manage,
if you use different direct formatting a say a single time. 

And there is not really an incentive to do this otherwise. For example CTRL+B
doesn't apply Character style BOLD, but DF BOLD. But not sure what CTRL+B and
CTRL+U would end up with. A single BU style. But what if there are identical
styles with same setting; different name. I'm already having trouble to see
difference between the styles Strong Emphasis and Main Index Entry (visually).
They look the same to me. Supposed to used somewhere else based on the name.
But the difference being?.. Have to compare both manually  

One of the reason Character style mind boggling for me. I highlight text pretty
often, do I need to configure a style for every color? And If I also mark part
bold, should I create a style for every color unbolded and bolded?

So in theory Character Styles might be 'better' practical you could excessive
amount of styles, without practical usefulness. 
And if we also export this stuff to DOCX you end up with even more styles with
lovely non-descript names. The number of created PS mostly oversee able,
however number character styles become rather explosive. And hard to maintain
with shortcuts (say I have 30 character styles; some hierarchical; I even find
30 shortcuts.. how I'm  I supposed remember all that. What every character
style is about; at which level it's set etc. I surely get lost.

And another problem with character styles is you have no way of knowing
(similar to PS). You can't tell is this DF, PS, CS. And you can't also not see
which CS it actually is. And you can't see PS/CS in the sidebar at once. It's
or/or. 

So Character styles might be 'addition' to DF, I don't see it as a replacement
of DF. So the whole mutuality distinct stuff doesn't hold in practice if you
ask me.

Currently I observe two issues
1) Activated PS style formatting is shown in DF toolbar: which makes it look
like DF (but it isn't)
2) Applying DF means the opposite of what the Style does. So if the style is
BOLD pressing the bold button (which is activated by styles) will:
* Unbold
* Activate DF formatting. Pressing BOLD again it still DF formatting 

Font color/font highlighting are suffering from the same problem.

The current implementation is over-complicating the matters for my taste. One
formatting toolbar (used by PS styles and DF without visual feedback). Without
any visual difference between DF bold or PS bold. 

If you want to use a single toolbar, be more explicit. So B button showing PS
or DF in the button somewhere or border or different highlight color whatever..
(the solution touches the area of accessibility; color blind probably dislike a
different colored button highlighting). This solves the knowing what you're
doing part.

The second issue is there is no way rid of specific Direct Formatting, except
CTRL+M. Which eradicates all DF; so can't be selective at all). So pressing a
DF button, it's toggled on (and can't be turned off). And you can't see in
document different between DF/PS (except now with the style inspector). But it
still doesn't "highlight" the areas with DF; you need to walk through the
document and look at what's popping up in the style inspector

So say I press CTRL+B; in a line, press CTRL+B to undo. It's still DF. If I
press CTRL+Z instead it will be OK. If you don't correct it immediately I you
might run into it later on.

And the easiness of changing a style makes to whole document look different
with few clicks is ruined; as there might be some unintended DF somewhere in
side the document next to intended DF. So even with the style inspector, you
still need to look closely. Yes, this could be avoided by Character styles. But
now you're at risk of having used the wrong 'character style' somewhere. So
applied  Main Index Entry (by shortcut) which looks the same as Strong Emphasis
initially (so no reason to check), but at the point you change Strong Emphasis,
this will appear. And you again need the check the whole document..

You need to very very disciplined to use DF/CS faultless to pick the fruits of
it. You need to have already an idea of the formatting in advance. A structure.
And you need to apply it really  consistently. And can be quite a time
consuming business. 

PS simply useful, as long as you don't outdo you're self with a the number of
styles. Character styles can be useful, depending on the situation but not a
holy grail (can't/won't replace DF).

I personally still convinced there must be something done to optimize this.
Without ruining the model. Or making a to hard to maintain for dev point of
view. But should usable from user point of view. 

Of course you may defend the PS/CS style. However there some view around which
sees styles as superior to DF in every case/setting; and as a holy grail. I'm
not convinced this is true. PS/CS is tool as DF. PS/CS can't replace DF. Both
need to life next to each other. They are not mutual exclusive as someways
stated. And should be either.

I see a problem here; I did some suggestions how to approve things. They might
not be desired.. but if acknowledge there is a problem, something should be
done about it.. Or another solution must be found. They Style Inspector is
useful, but doesn't solve the "core"/ the heart of the problem(s) at stake. 

Already struggled with the formatting thing quite a while. The current
implementation doesn't land. It's counter-intuitive/unnatural in some ways. I
really have to focus/concentrate on the styles/formatting. It really costs
mental effort. And you can easily drown (hierarchical relations between styles
at the same style level (say PS). Interaction of styles at PS and CS level.
Number of styles). So if really want to those big time, you really need to now
what you're doing or you get surely lost. And don't everybody being able to
handle that properly.

-- 
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/20200902/0887ae05/attachment-0001.htm>