[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 157006] UX review needed for Options - Writer - Compatibility dialog

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.documentfoundation.org]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157006

--- Comment #2 from Heiko Tietze <heiko.tietze at documentfoundation.org> ---
Created attachment 189339
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=189339&action=edit
Dialog

(In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #0)
> * better sequencing of options?
> 
>    e.g., all "paragraph and table" spacing options together?
>          all the 1.1 options together?

Sounds good to me (and has no consequences for the l10n team)

> * maybe separate heading is unnecessary for "Form menu" if there is only
> going to be one change like this.  (see also bug 126375, comment 2)

This one is a global option while all other are saved per document. There are a
few more yet not exposed at the UI, see
https://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/officecfg/registry/schema/org/openoffice/Office/Compatibility.xcs?r=28675af8#168

>    "Reorganize" is not a good word for the label.  
>     Better label might be "Form dropdown menu like Microsoft".  

"Microsoft compatible Form menu" maybe. But I'd rather omit this option as a
corner case and to clean up the dialog.

> * general review of option labels for possible improvements/corrections
>      (e.g., bug 141676)

As a rule of thumb we could start the entries with an action. Like "Add.." ,
"Use..." etc. "Word-compatible trailing blanks" could become "Use...".
I don't like "Protect form (..." but ultimately all these options requires to
study the help. And I'd keep the burden low for l10n.  

> * is the scroll box really needed?  (i.e., general design/layout of dialog
> can probably be simplified)

Nothing bad with it on macOS.

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