Description: The description is very short. 1. Put the mouse in the footer. 2. Click menu > Insert > Page Number. The page number field will be inserted with Default Style character style, instead of Page number character style (expected). The expected behavior is also described in the wiki: > The default setting is for it to use the Page Number character style. > -- https://help.libreoffice.org/Writer/Page_Number_1 Steps to Reproduce: - Actual Results: - Expected Results: - Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: Yes Additional Info:
(In reply to John from comment #0) I confirm that behaviour, but let's ask design team, if this is a bug or not sure about it. > The expected behavior is also described in the wiki: > > > The default setting is for it to use the Page Number character style. > > -- https://help.libreoffice.org/Writer/Page_Number_1 This is outdated. For actual help see https://help.libreoffice.org/6.3/en-US/text/swriter/guide/footer_pagenumber.html?DbPAR=WRITER#bm_id3155624
The footer content gets the Footer paragraph style, and I don't see a reason why the character style has to be changed. The Page Number character style is by the way identical to Default. Do we really have to modify the appearance of page numbers in the footer? Wouldn't say so.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2) > Do we really have to modify the appearance of page numbers in the footer? Wouldn't say so. I don't mean to change the appearance - I mean to change the applied character style. I.e. the change in the semantics.
[Automated Action] NeedInfo-To-Unconfirmed
(In reply to John from comment #3) > I don't mean to change the appearance - I mean to change the applied > character style. I.e. the change in the semantics. Sure, you want to change the Default character style to Page Number. What I mean is when you apply a character style it is done with the intention to modify this part of the paragraph (which has a dedicated style). I don't see any need for that.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #5) > when you apply a character style it is done with the intention to > modify this part of the paragraph Well, it is just a different school :-)
edit: school of thought.
(In reply to John from comment #6) > Well, it is just a different school :-) So my KISS school would rather remove the obsolete character styles. I vote for WF. Other opinions?
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #8) > So my KISS school would rather remove the obsolete character styles. I vote > for WF. Other opinions? I must admit, that I don't understand the combination of paragraph style and character style at all. When Iinsert a footnote it has paragraph style "Footnote" and character style "Default Style". Can "Default Style" be understood as "Style defined by paragraph style"? If this is the case I agree we can remove the character style "Footnote". But it also should become more clear, what "Default style" of a character style means.
(In reply to Dieter Praas from comment #9) > I must admit, that I don't understand the combination of paragraph style and > character style at all. The paragraph is all text until the next break. Typically a sematic unit like an idea or a citation. The character style applies to a section of text within the paragraph for example to highlight words. > Can "Default Style" be understood as "Style defined by paragraph style"? Default (character style) means no character style is applied. So it takes all formatting from the paragraph style. > If this is the case I agree we can remove the character style "Footnote". It is Page Number - and could also be applied to the actual content in some weird scenarios. But I don't see a reason to keep this as well as several other character styles. OTOH, there is not much need to delete item except usability concerns.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #8) > So my KISS school would rather remove the obsolete character styles. I vote > for WF. Other opinions? It seems that there are many other character styles which does not differ from the default one: * Caption Characters * Definition * Drop Caps * Endnote Characters * Footnote Characters * Index Link * Line Numbering * Numbering Symbols
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #10) > Default (character style) means no character style is applied. So it takes > all formatting from the paragraph style. Would be perhaps more clear, if it would be named "Paragraph style" (or something similar). Of course that's out of the scope of this bug report. > > > If this is the case I agree we can remove the character style "Footnote". > > It is Page Number - and could also be applied to the actual content in some > weird scenarios. Of course you're right. Sorry for confusion (but I think it might be the same with "Footnote")
(In reply to Dieter Praas from comment #12) > Would be perhaps more clear, if it would be named "Paragraph style" (or > something similar). Of course that's out of the scope of this bug report. Character style named "Paragraph style"? I don't think this idea is really good :-). Personally, I like the logic of Writer styles - much better then Word. It seems there are 3 points to think about in the context of this discussion: 1. should "Page number" style be applied automatically? 2. should "Page number" style be removed completely? 2.1. should another character styles (the above-mentioned ones which doesn't have any visual properties) be removed as well.
Just my 2 cents: People that don't know how a feature works shouldn't argue for or against it. So if the entire concept of style formatting isn't understood, please don't try to change it. The lack of information may lead to the false direction of decisions. To the "empty" character styles: It would be interesting to know why they were added to the list and if they always had no difference to Default character style. I see no sense in having styles that are identical to the default especially because many people complain about too many styles in the sidebar.
Some character styles may be used in other features. For example the "Numbering Symbols" character style is used in the "Bullets and Numbering" dialog. If a style will be deleted, we must ensure that such side effects will be detected and solved.
> It would be interesting to know why they were added to the list > and if they always had no difference to Default character style. > I see no sense in having styles that are identical to the default > especially because many people complain about too many styles in > the sidebar. For the sake of justice, I should say that the list of character styles is not very large. I believe, the complaining about "too many styles" ir related to the paragraph styles.
pls leave as NotABug It might well be that the mentioned character style is used in certain situations? In any case I would not bother about something that I do not understand right away but doesn't hurt me either.
We talked about this topic in the design meeting. Character styles are usually not applied automatically neither needed for the page number at the footer => NAB. We also decided to not remove items from the list because the list is not too long and some might be needed. And updating the list to have different types is a laborious task with not much benefit.