Bug Hunting Session
Bug 109124 - Change fields in Address Data/Book Source to be the same as in Mail Merge Wizard
Summary: Change fields in Address Data/Book Source to be the same as in Mail Merge Wizard
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Writer (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
5.0.0.5 release
Hardware: All All
: medium trivial
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: Mail-Merge Address-Source
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2017-07-14 16:01 UTC by Timur
Modified: 2019-06-13 14:44 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments
Compare fields in Address Data/Book Source and Mail Merge Wizard (256.63 KB, image/png)
2017-07-14 16:01 UTC, Timur
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Timur 2017-07-14 16:01:28 UTC
Created attachment 134632 [details]
Compare fields in Address Data/Book Source and Mail Merge Wizard

Fields are not the same in File - Wizards - Address Data Source, Tools - Address Book Source and on the other side Tools - Mail Merge Wizard.
Fields should be unified, and missing fields added to both Address Data/Book Source. Those are: E-mail, Gender, Title, Telephone business. 
Interesting there's no Fax on neither but it's still in use, so recommended. 

This is somewhat a regression because OO had a large list of fields in Address Data and it's reduced, too much in my opinion, while not unifying with Mail Merge Wizard. 
I can't see a reason why this wouldn't be the same. If there is, please write. 

So, bibisectRequest here would be helpful to find the last Address Data fields change. Looks like it was in 5.0.
Comment 1 Timur 2017-07-21 12:21:12 UTC
Note: from Bug 105534:
(In reply to Michael Potts from comment #0)
> For starters, users might want to set up their own fields. 
My reply there:  
May be relevant, although I don't need it myself, you can match whatever you want. 

> For an efficient mail-merge it is often useful to combine full
> names -- not everyone's name falls into the neat First Name Last Name
> format; my wife and I have different last names. A Fullname field is much
> better. Why can't variables have their own names, as in WordPerfect?
My reply there:
But what if you want "Mr. X"? Why can't you simple put "First Nick" as First and "Last1 Last2" as Last or whatever?
Comment 2 Heiko Tietze 2017-08-08 11:33:27 UTC
Harmonizing the labels is of no question. It would be nice to have also similar dialogs. And finally an alternative to the situation where we end with many input fields, of that most are empty, I suggest one property dropdown containing the various fields and a value input (dropdown) listing the content depending on the selected property. Furthermore an Add button to confirm the new association and small delete buttons attached to the list of property-selections. Ask for a mockup  if that isn't clear.

At least the simple addition of fields might be an easyhack.

(Removing UX)