Bug 125886 - Sub-optimal distribution of footnotes with "Not larger than page area" setting and a large table
Summary: Sub-optimal distribution of footnotes with "Not larger than page area" settin...
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Writer (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
6.4.0.0.alpha0+ Master
Hardware: All All
: medium normal
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: Footnote-Endnote Page-Dialog
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2019-06-12 15:35 UTC by Telesto
Modified: 2019-06-13 19:59 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments
Example file (13.40 KB, application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text)
2019-06-12 15:36 UTC, Telesto
Details
example with footnote height of 14 cm (14.36 KB, application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text)
2019-06-13 09:39 UTC, Dieter Praas
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Telesto 2019-06-12 15:35:54 UTC
Description:
Uneven distribution of footnotes

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Open the attached file
2. Page 2 has no footnotes at all;
3. Format -> Page -> Footnote
4. Set maximum footnote height to 13,4 (or something between 13-15) -> Quite even distribution

Actual Results:
The algorithm used for 'Not larger than page area" as particular preferences


Expected Results:
I would expect something like step 4..


Reproducible: Always


User Profile Reset: No



Additional Info:
Version: 6.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x86)
Build ID: ac14e5613597e7361ce6995dacb1bb5bd55b6b00
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3; UI render: default; VCL: win; 
TinderBox: Win-x86@42, Branch:master, Time: 2019-06-06_05:09:49
Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); UI-Language: en-US
Calc: threaded
Comment 1 Telesto 2019-06-12 15:36:18 UTC
Created attachment 152139 [details]
Example file
Comment 2 Dieter Praas 2019-06-13 09:39:33 UTC
Created attachment 152164 [details]
example with footnote height of 14 cm

I can't confirm it. Looks good with height of 14 cm.

Version: 6.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x64)
Build ID: b170256fb6ebaf774b02b89835b19d9f3a1afb89
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: default; VCL: win; 
TinderBox: Win-x86_64@42, Branch:master, Time: 2019-06-07_03:30:35
Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI-Language: en-US
Calc: threaded
Comment 3 Telesto 2019-06-13 09:55:10 UTC
(In reply to Dieter Praas from comment #2)
> Created attachment 152164 [details]
> example with footnote height of 14 cm
> 
> I can't confirm it. Looks good with height of 14 cm.
> 
> Version: 6.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x64)
> Build ID: b170256fb6ebaf774b02b89835b19d9f3a1afb89
> CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: default; VCL: win; 
> TinderBox: Win-x86_64@42, Branch:master, Time: 2019-06-07_03:30:35
> Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI-Language: en-US
> Calc: threaded

Sorry, the report is maybe a little confusing. I intended to demonstrate the flaw of the default/automatic setting 'Not larger than page area' algorithm. The automatic distribution of footnotes is far from optimal, IMHO. I would expect something similar to a manual setting (with a footnote height of 13-15 cm).

So indeed, it looks good with height of 14 cm, but the distribution of footnotes with 'Not larger than page area' is slightly dubious (in cases with tables around)
Comment 4 Dieter Praas 2019-06-13 10:52:26 UTC
(In reply to Telesto from comment #3)
> So indeed, it looks good with height of 14 cm, but the distribution of
> footnotes with 'Not larger than page area' is slightly dubious (in cases
> with tables around)

So perhaps we should change bug summary to "FOOTNOTES: Malfunction of "Not larger than page area" setting.

Help says: "Not larger than page area: Automatically adjusts the height of the footnote area depending on the number of footnotes."

Expected result: Distribution should bea at least as good as with manual setting

Do you agree, Telesto