[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 153106] Revert commit of Bug 91415 - Scale Calc's comment indicator with zoom level (please, do not)

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153106

--- Comment #22 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalroz1 at gmx.com> ---
(In reply to ady from comment #21)
> > I disagree with that. On the contrary, I see it as a problem if the comment
> > indicator does not draw your attention.
> 
> Yes, if that were to be a problem.

It has definitely been a problem: bug 56677. But the "fix" was insufficient in
my opinion. Things have certainly not gotten to the level of visibility of MS
Excel, and in absolute terms - it's really not good enough.

> There is no report claiming that the comment indicator cannot be seen.

There is now: Bug 154080.

> The user should be able to see it, but it
> should not be "the main thing"; that would be distracting.

It _needs_ to distract - while not interfering with the visibility of the
actual cell contents.

> (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #20)
> > There are (at least) two usability considerations/problems regarding comment
> > indications:
> > 
> > 1. On one hand, it's a problem when comment indicators hide content.
> > 2. On the other hand, it's a problem if comment indicators are not
> > clearly-visible, as I might inadvertently miss them
> > 
> > Bug 91415 was opened regarding the first usability problem, not the second
> > one. Also, bug 91415 did not ask for any changes at high zoom levels - it
> > regarded the situation without playing with the zoom level.
> 
> That sounds as if the request explicitly said "I cannot use the zoom feature
> to solve this"

A bug was reported in the behavior without the user applying zoom. Whatever
changes in the behavior when zooming in or out cannot resolve the bug.

> The reason users do not mention zoom in bug 91415 is
> because they are simply not aware that the zoom feature resolves the problem.

No, that's not the reason, and no, it doesn't resolve the problem. ... which is
also why the patch should not have included scaling at different zoom levels -
because zoom is irrelevant to the bug.

> There is no physical way to
> _simultaneously_ see more details and to see "the big picture" in the same
> UI. That's the reason to use zoom.

Of course there is. More than one way even. The use of the triangle shape
rather than the dot/small square is one such way. One can think of others.

> I could take almost any cell, with a clear visible text and indicator, scale
> the zoom factor to, say, 20%, and show how it is an inconvenience.

It doesn't matter what happens at zoom 20% nor at zoom 500%. Both cell
contents, and comment indicators, must be clearly visible at zoom 100%.

(or rather - it does matter, but not in the context of bug 91415.)

Anyway, I don't understand why you're arguing with one of the people who agrees
with you. In fact, you're undermining your own request for back-out by claiming
that what happens at different zoom levels has bearing on 91415.

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