Description: The active color in the Page Area tab looks like set to black (because of the black preview). Probably a white field with a grayish cross is more appropriated, because no color is applied at all. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Format menu -> Page -> Area tab -> Color. Look at the color marked as "active" Actual Results: The black color seems to be active Expected Results: No color is set, so no color should be showed as active. Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Version: 6.0.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: cbf371e07fd5dea1ea08a1f299360d1273961ebd CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.19; UI render: default; TinderBox: Win-x86@42, Branch:master, Time: 2017-06-14_23:13:57 Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); Calc: CL User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/45.0
Created attachment 134183 [details] Screenshot
Yeah. Arch Linux 64-bit, KDE Plasma 5 Version: 6.0.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: f808c50c6eece87d515df3b84b1c774395b5d9bc CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 4.11; UI render: default; VCL: kde4; Locale: fi-FI (fi_FI.UTF-8); Calc: group Built on June 26th 2017
Let's turn this into a easy hack. The code is here: cui/source/tabpages/tparea.cxx Check the SvxAreaTabPage class
Hi, I want to work on this easyhack. A little help will be really supportive.
Hi Ekansh Jha - so of course, first you need to get a build of LibreOffice; http://devcentral.libreoffice.org/devguide.html or https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build are places to look. After that read and play with the code modules that Tamas linked.
(In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #5) > Hi Ekansh Jha - so of course, first you need to get a build of LibreOffice; > http://devcentral.libreoffice.org/devguide.html or > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build are places to > look. > > After that read and play with the code modules that Tamas linked. Ok will try to solve it.
(In reply to Michael Meeks from comment #5) > Hi Ekansh Jha - so of course, first you need to get a build of LibreOffice; > http://devcentral.libreoffice.org/devguide.html or > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build are places to > look. > > After that read and play with the code modules that Tamas linked. Please define what should be the expected result. "Probably a white field with a grayish cross is more appropriated" or "No color is set, so no color should be showed as active." I am a bit confused
(In reply to Ekansh Jha from comment #7) > Please define what should be the expected result. "Probably a white field > with a grayish cross is more appropriated" or "No color is set, so no color > should be showed as active." I don't no what it should be. Not black, as there is no active color set. Adding UX-advise.
The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay?
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you > have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from > an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, > it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. > > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? I'm not sure any crossed-out thing is implemented anywhere in the code. Also clearing the RGB/Hex values might be tricky, since this kind of number fields always show someting. So from that point it's not an easy hack. @ Ekansh Jha, I suggest you to find another easy hack for hacking. I'll remove this one from the easy hack list.
(In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #11) > (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > > The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you > > have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from > > an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, > > it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. > > > > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? > > I'm not sure any crossed-out thing is implemented anywhere in the code. Also > clearing the RGB/Hex values might be tricky, since this kind of number > fields always show someting. So from that point it's not an easy hack. > > @ Ekansh Jha, I suggest you to find another easy hack for hacking. I'll > remove this one from the easy hack list. Ok, thank you so much for informing. I'll find another easy hack.
(In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #11) > (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > > The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you > > have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from > > an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, > > it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. > > > > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? > > I'm not sure any crossed-out thing is implemented anywhere in the code. Also > clearing the RGB/Hex values might be tricky, since this kind of number > fields always show someting. So from that point it's not an easy hack. > > @ Ekansh Jha, I suggest you to find another easy hack for hacking. I'll > remove this one from the easy hack list. @ Ekansh Jha: Sorry for that, I expected to have the same "No fill" behavior what we already have in other cases (e.g. character highlighting), but it's OK, if UX guys, want something different.
(In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #13) > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #11) > > (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > > > The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you > > > have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from > > > an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, > > > it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. > > > > > > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? > > > > I'm not sure any crossed-out thing is implemented anywhere in the code. Also > > clearing the RGB/Hex values might be tricky, since this kind of number > > fields always show someting. So from that point it's not an easy hack. > > > > @ Ekansh Jha, I suggest you to find another easy hack for hacking. I'll > > remove this one from the easy hack list. > > @ Ekansh Jha: Sorry for that, I expected to have the same "No fill" behavior Please don't be > what we already have in other cases (e.g. character highlighting), but it's > OK, if UX guys, want something different. btw Thank you for informing early.
(In reply to Ekansh Jha from comment #14) > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #13) > > (In reply to Tamás Zolnai from comment #11) > > > (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > > > > The active color shows how the object is defined currently. Meaning when you > > > > have a shape the #729fcf is effective and works properly. When you come from > > > > an undefined state, meaning no color or a different type of filling is set, > > > > it could indeed be crossed out and the RGB/Hex values could be cleared. > > > > > > > > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? > > > > > > I'm not sure any crossed-out thing is implemented anywhere in the code. Also > > > clearing the RGB/Hex values might be tricky, since this kind of number > > > fields always show someting. So from that point it's not an easy hack. > > > > > > @ Ekansh Jha, I suggest you to find another easy hack for hacking. I'll > > > remove this one from the easy hack list. > > > > @ Ekansh Jha: Sorry for that, I expected to have the same "No fill" behavior > Please don't be > > what we already have in other cases (e.g. character highlighting), but it's > > OK, if UX guys, want something different. > btw Thank you for informing early. A very similar issue is bug 111769. There the new color is set someting wrong when the dialog initialized.
I will be working on it
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > Don't remember why this wasn't implemented correctly. Do you remember, Jay? Cant remember if this was our intended implementation or not, but the cross out image to fill the box and removed values from the RGB/hex fields sound good to me.
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
*** Bug 133126 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 108669 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Quote from bug 108669 comment 13 Opening the Area -> Color panel arriving from another Area type, especially default 'None' mode, opens the Active Color with no actual assigned color--and incorrect indicator of what would be assigned. The GUI shows a Black (#ffffff) swatch, but with default 114, 159, 207 RGB values for #729fcf Area fill (Old Tango: Sky Blue 1, now Light Blue 2 on Standard palette). Once the New color #729fcf, or another pick from pallet or custom pick made, is applied--the GUI will refresh. If pick is made from Standard palette or swittched to and made from another installed pallet--the indicator on the palette swatches will show the pick. Until a pick is made and applied the color Swatch is wrong, while the lack of an swatch indicator on the pallet GUI--could be seen as correct, no Color has been selected/applied yet--but would be more consistent UI to show what would be applied. Work on bug 108670 should resolve this with a better null color assignment, tweaking the UI to either symbolize the null area fill.
Dear Telesto, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug