[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 156109] Mutual exclusion of split-preventing options in Text Flow is confusing.

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156109

--- Comment #3 from Kazinator <kaz at kylheku.com> ---
(In reply to Dieter from comment #1)
> Kazinator, for me your proposal is confusing, because what is the meaning of
> "none"? There can be only two possibilities: splitting the paragraph or not
> not splitting the paragraph. So what happens, if you select "none"?
> But let's ask design team.

Thanks for your comments.

None means there is no split prevention. The paragraph breaks abruptly wherever
the page (or other container) ends.  Then the radio has two choices for how to
prevent splits. Keep the paragraph all together, or use widow/orphan controls.

I agree that the proposed wording could be improved because it perpetrates
semantic double negatives, which is confusing. The entire category is "split
prevention" which is a kind of negative: how not to do something, not to split.
So then "none" constitutes a double negative. Do not not split: i.e. split
arbitrary.

It made sense to me at the time, but I also had to think about it for a moment.

A somewhat verbose alternative:

  Allow paragraph to split across page breaks?

  (*) Split freely at any line of the paragraph.

  ( ) Do not split; keep entire paragraph together.

  ( ) Split, keeping some lines together, as specified:

      [ ] Minimum Top Fragment     [    ] Lines
      [ ] Minimum Bottom Fragment  [    ] Lines

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