Description: Footnote area in Tools _> Footnotes and endnotes not self-explaining Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open Writer 2. tools -> Footnotes and endnotes 3. Notice Styles -> Footnote area Actual Results: - Expected Results: In read footnote area as 'footnote text' but it's about Footnote numbering. So call it: Numbering footnote area (it should fit). And "numbering text area" instead of simply "text area" And mixing 'paragraph style' and "character styles" under one label. Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Version: 7.2.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 3ed9bba283a6a67864c0928186e277240be0d9ba CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3 Build 9600; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); UI: en-US Calc: CL
Help says: "Select the character style that you want to use for footnote anchors in the text area of your document." Don't see what's unclear here (besides the extensive options to customize footnotes). Up to documentation whether this requires more explanation.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1) > Help says: "Select the character style that you want to use for footnote > anchors in the text area of your document." Don't see what's unclear here > (besides the extensive options to customize footnotes). Up to documentation > whether this requires more explanation. A: Reading the manual/help is always second best. The experience is people don't read those. B) And in your logic, it would be fine to add labels A,B,C,D,E,F,G. With a transposition table in help. What does A mean here -> read the manual. No not user friendly (sorry my kind of sarcastic today; not to taken personally) The point being.. I'm opening the dialog, reading the labels, can't make much sense out of it. I read 'footnote area' as footnote text area.. where it's only changing 'numbering'. It's even hard to tell if you simply try. Yes, I first read the label (and try to make sense of it). B well let's simply try. C last resort.. HELP But well noticing the difference for single digit number (whereas I was focused on 'footnote text area).. well. And "Text Area"; lets try text area.. does that do the 'formatting of the footnote text'. Nope.. That's the formatting of the numbering in the main text. So or the label is wrong (yes it is). Or this needs an info tooltip. Aside of the question if those settings really needed (do think it is) and/or using styles to configure (not totally sure). And obviously the dialog is also lacking a preview (which would be the an alternative). How the hell should I know what the styles look like.. Well yes, look them up in the sidebar styles.. but that you can't access with Footnote dialog open. [Note I'm extending my complains left and right, I started with 'label' and that's my core concern.. but well there is more to it, IMHO]
(In reply to Telesto from comment #2) > I'm opening the dialog, reading the labels, can't make much sense out of it. Complex software requires learning. Being as simple as Google makes (some) apps results either in less features (GDocs) or more effort analyzing the results (web search). Nothing bad in this but tweaking the hell out of footnotes is definitely not meant for Benjamins but requested by the Eves. Anyway, the topic is in the hand of the documentation team and I welcome when it's bounced back to UX.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1) > Help says: "Select the character style that you want to use for footnote > anchors in the text area of your document." That is also the text for the extended tooltip. If changes are made to the tooltip, then possibly that change could be incorporated in the help page. > Don't see what's unclear here Neither do I. >Up to documentation whether this requires more explanation. No obvious change is needed in the help page. https://help.libreoffice.org/7.2/en-US/text/swriter/01/06080100.html If there is a specific recommendation for a change there, then send it here. Meanwhile, the discussion in comments 2 and 3 imply ==> UI
(In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #4) > Meanwhile, the discussion in comments 2 and 3 imply ==> UI A) True, there is no issue with documentation B) The 'extended tooltips' are disabled by default on Windows (and personally don't like those being enabled by default). So I my information source are the labels itself
We discussed this topic in the design meeting and agree with renaming. Proposal is to use "marker" instead of "area". Meaning "Text area" and "Footnote area" to "Text marker" and "Footnote marker". This is an easyhack, just needs to change the ui file sw/uiconfig/swriter/ui/footnotepage.ui
For footnote tab: Paragraph -> Footnote text Text area -> Anchor in text Footnote area -> Anchor in footnote For endnote tab: Paragraph -> Endnote text Text area -> Anchor in text Footnote area -> Anchor in endnote iiuc, all control names in dialog needs colons.
Maybe tooltips will also help with "self-explaining" > Paragraph -> Footnote text Tooltip for label: Choose paragraph style for text in footnote area > Text area -> Anchor in text Tooltip: Choose character style for footnote sign in document text > Footnote area -> Anchor in footnote Tooltip: Choose character style for footnote sign in footnote text alternative: sign -> marker Comparable tooltips (but adjusted) for Endnote.
I personally prefer label change.. Tooltip is likely 'extended tooltip'. Not present by default.
(In reply to Telesto from comment #9) > I personally prefer label change.. The suggestion is BOTH, not either/or. But what is your view about the different label proposals here? > Tooltip is likely 'extended tooltip'. Not present by default. True, there are extended tooltips. But it is also possible, and proposed in comment 8, to add tooltips to the labels, which would always be present (in addition to label changes).
(In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #10) > (In reply to Telesto from comment #9) > > I personally prefer label change.. > The suggestion is BOTH, not either/or. > But what is your view about the different label proposals here? > > > Tooltip is likely 'extended tooltip'. Not present by default. > True, there are extended tooltips. > But it is also possible, and proposed in comment 8, to add tooltips to the > labels, which would always be present (in addition to label changes). +1 from me for labels + tooltip.
(In reply to Telesto from comment #11) > (In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #10) > > (In reply to Telesto from comment #9) > > > I personally prefer label change.. > > The suggestion is BOTH, not either/or. > > But what is your view about the different label proposals here? > > > > > Tooltip is likely 'extended tooltip'. Not present by default. > > True, there are extended tooltips. > > But it is also possible, and proposed in comment 8, to add tooltips to the > > labels, which would always be present (in addition to label changes). > > +1 from me for labels + tooltip. Note: I personally prefer include someone from Documentation & Translation. I always imagine the their objecting in sense creating work again [and objection I prefer to ignore). The point is improvement. However I do value translation aspects. Label/Tooltips to small, hard to translate issues. But well, no clue what the contact person would be in that area (Sophie/Oliver?)