| Summary: | Don't add a space after E# in ToC | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | LibreOffice | Reporter: | John <johnsmithbeatles> |
| Component: | Writer | Assignee: | Not Assigned <libreoffice-bugs> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | noreply+28110 |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 7.1.5.2 release | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Crash report or crash signature: | Regression By: | ||
|
Description
John
2021-10-31 15:28:40 UTC
This is a follow-on to AsLO question https://ask.libreoffice.org/t/remove-the-default-space-in-the-toc-between-chapter-number-and-the-chapter-itself/69887/2 I fully support the request. There is no point adding any character to the raw E# capture. This spurious space goes against the "principle of least astonishment". Users should be able to predict reliably what they'd get. Bug also present in 7.1.6.2.0+ (Fedora 34 release). It is a very interesting topic. I think that when you read informative post you gain new knowledge and it develops our mind. I like the valuable information you provide in your post. I’m quite certain I will learn lots of new stuff right here! https://essaysnassignments.co.uk/essay-writing-service/ Confirmed in Version: 7.2.1.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 2c9f9a7aa7c967a1b7ec3448959cff87b32f6580 This is definitely undesirable. The tool for building the TOC is really powerful (once you got the hang of it), and allows you to configure the formatting of the TOC items into fine detail, but this ruins it. In my document, I apply the rule of a dash surrounded by thin space characters, except in the table of contents which imposes a standard space even when I don't want it. So I support this change but it raises a usability issue since novice users expect to have a blank space by default and may be confused by the TOC menu (I find the "Structure and Formatting" customization tool very confusing). This report is a duplicate of #114773 so I close the last one. Thank you for reporting. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 114773 *** |