Created attachment 170137 [details] func element in Math Currently the 'func' entry in Math' Elements pane (screenshot in the attachment) inserts this formula: > func func(<?>) I suppose that for a beginner user, it is not obvious here that the second "func" in the inserted template is meant to be changed (it is not the usual placeholder "<?>"). I suggest either change the insertion into > func <?>(<?>) which would make the "<?>" the formula name, but that is no worse than now, and still suggests user to modify it, or alternatively, to something like > func yourfuncname(<?>) which would still suggest that the function name is not set in stone (but then the question arises in translatability of this name, because it would only be surely telling to English-speaking audience). See https://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/295827/can-i-add-functions-to-math/, where user had hard time finding this in the UI, possibly because of this.
If there is no way of translating newfuncname (as proposed on ask.libo) or yourfuncname and something generic like "<abc>" or "<foo>" is odd, the only way to go seems this "<?>". Any other idea? Code pointer: starmath/inc/strings.hxx => #define RID_FUNCX "func func(<?>) "
We discussed this topic in the design meeting. + func <?>(<?>) is hard to understand + func <name>(<?>) is not localizable, but this function is likely used by experts and the terminology is well-known Code pointer in comment 1.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2) > + func <?>(<?>) is hard to understand > + func <name>(<?>) is not localizable, but this function is > likely used by experts and the terminology is well-known Note that in Math, the "<?>" is *well-known* in the formula text window: it is always inserted wherever any placeholder is needed. This same insertion *already* has it: "func func(<?>)". The only difference here is that this "<?>" is *usually* shown as a box in the upper "preview" window, and in this case, it would not appear there as the box, but as literal "<?>". However, *for users of Math*, "<?>" would be more likely to be familiar than any other placeholder syntax.
Created attachment 170205 [details] Comparison of selection of proposed placeholders (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2) The screenshot shows a combined image of how Math *highlights* the parts of placeholders in the upper panel. In case of "<?>", clicking on it in the upper panel draws the dotted rectangle around the whole placeholder. For "<name>", it is treated as three distinct elements - "function <", text "name", and operator "greater than >". This even makes the opening "<" and closing ">" use different fonts and look inconsustent.
(In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #3) > Note that in Math, the "<?>" is *well-known*... Has been taken into account. As always: UX does recommendations. Feel free to go with <?> instead of <name>.
I pushed a possible fix to gerrit: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/127393 Please review it :-)
Jeff Huang committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/54115790926a5964534472dff7e4661ea34acb28 tdf#140726 Change func func(<?>) to func <?>(<?>) in Math It will be available in 7.4.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Jeff Huang committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-7-3": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/b404a6fbbd254c19599b81a3b2f9ee85f0ac8c04 tdf#140726 Change func func(<?>) to func <?>(<?>) in Math It will be available in 7.3.0.2. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.