<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Redundancy in Table of Contents and Indexes" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134781#c8">Comment # 8</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_UNCONFIRMED " title="UNCONFIRMED - Redundancy in Table of Contents and Indexes" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134781">bug 134781</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:page74010-sf@yahoo.fr" title="ajlittoz <page74010-sf@yahoo.fr>"> ajlittoz</a> <pre>(In reply to Heiko Tietze from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134781#c7">comment #7</a>) > (In reply to ajlittoz from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134781#c6">comment #6</a>) > > When you select Table of Figures, it presets "Table of Figures" in the Title > > field and pre-selects "Figure" in the Category menu. With Index of Tables, > > Title is set as "Index of Tables" and Category to "Table". > > What's wrong with that? Do you expect tables to be listed under figures, or > the like? Not at all. My point was only to say that selecting a Type presets options states in other UI widgets. ToF and IoT give different settings. I don't request tables to be listed under figures. If you want to do that (if any), select Type ToF and set Category to Table. Criss-cross but some may have a taste for it. > > > A secondary difference appears in the Entries tab: ToF offers the LS and LE > > markers while IoT does not. > > What's wrong with that? Do you expect the same configuration? Yes, and this is where it is wrong. Since the output is the same, the settings should be the same. I suppose table building ends up in the same piece of code. Then it should be triggered by only one entry point. > > > Apart from the preselection, the options in the dialog are rigorously the > > same and the result is the same. Accessing the same output through two > > different menu items is disturbing. > > The use case is to create _different_ ToC for tables and figures. Works > perfectly for me. If you want both in one ToC select user-defined and check > below what to include. I never asked for merging tables and figures in the same list. This is meaningless and probably results in a mess. > > > My preference is to have a "Table of Figures, Illustrations, …" AND an > > "Index of Tables, Illustrations, …"... > > Disagree with tables and figures in one index. But please excuse my > non-native speaker ignorance: What is the difference between figures and > illustrations? I am also not a native-speaker, this may be the cause of the difficulty to precisely address the point. "Figure" and "Illustration" are the first two categories in the Category drop-down menu. The others are Table, Text, Drawing. Maybe Figure is listed first because it is preselected. "built-in" order seems to be Illustration, Table, Text, Drawing, Figure. These are the name of the built-in number ranges used to caption inserted "objects". There is no inherent semantic difference between figure, illustration or picture. The used word depends on the document. It is a user choice for the list name under which the captions are collected. Once again I don't want tables and figures in one index. The wording in the Type drop down menu is misleading: "Table of Figures" and "Index of Tables" allow you to do the SAME thing, provided the set correctly the other options, under two different menu items. And as I already argumented, using word "Table" in the first and "Index" in the second suggests the output is different. Namely, if you select "Table", you get a list in document order (present result). If you select "Index of Tables", you expect the list in alphabetical order of captions, which is not the case. You simply get the same list as if you had selected "Table of Figures" with the needed adjustments in "Category" menu. This is a UI issue. There is no bug (apart from the suppression of LS/LE in Index of Tables Entries tab). Then, either "Index of Tables" is removed with no impact for users apart from adjusting the Category menu choice when creating a table. Anyway, users most of the time enter a more specific text in Title to fit their document. So they almost always do customise the settings in this control dialog. Or the code for producing "Index of Tables" is patched to deliver a table in alphabetical order (and this becomes consistent with wording "Index of …" and the lack of LS/LE in Entries). This means that building the "index" uses the same code as Alphabetical Index, instead of the code for producing a ToC.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>