Due to Bug 107573, Tools | Outline Numbering was renamed to Chapter Numbering.
I believe this was a mistake, for the following reasons:
R1. Most LO writer documents don't have Chapters.
R2. LO doesn't really have a concept of a Chapter. We have Sections, we have Headings, but no chapters. If you look at the Help pages for LO (writer), and search for Chapter, you will find pages mentioning Tools | Chapter Numbering, and a page which mentions "Chapter numbers" in captions, but its contents does not discuss chapters, only outline number levels.
R3. The argument for the rename, if I may recap it briefly is that the two concepts are conflated, and that "Chapter Numbering" is widely used and users will at least as easily, or more easily, identify the feature using the new name. Even if this is true in Dutch, French and German, it is not true in other languages, including English, Hebrew, and to my knowledge also Arabic.
The current state of affairs is confusing in two senses:
S1. A user (who doesn't speak French, German or Dutch) trying to setup their outline numbering will fail to locate where to do so, since, most likely, their document has no chapters.
S2. Users may expect to be able to create Chapters, and confused by the inconsistent reference to their existence.
I think "Chapter" is the only way to make in unambiguous. "Outline" is already used for a set of predefined list styles and that has resulted in the confusion. And "section", the other possible term, is used for the special feature available via Insert > Section, and those "sections" are unrelated.
If a literal translation of "Chapter" is not meaningful for a language, then this can be solved in the localization.
I do not see problem S1. If I search in the help for "outline numbering" the link goes to the correct help page "chapter numbering". That help page might need a hint, why the title is not "Outline numbering".
But you are right, other places in the UI and help use "outline" in the sense of structure of a document via headings on several levels.
I do not see problem S2. It is called "chapter numbering", which implicates for me, that there exist already a "chapter".
(In reply to Regina Henschel from comment #1)
> I think "Chapter" is the only way to make in unambiguous.
Chapter is unambiguous - but in the wrong way: It's unambiguously not what the user is looking for, so will unambiguously be skipped.
It is also unambiguously false - as the dialog does not allow for any definition involving Chapters.
> "Outline" is
> already used for a set of predefined list styles and that has resulted in
> the confusion.
I'm not following. What predefined list styles? I don't see list styles named "outline". The predefined list styles are named "Bullet (whatever)" and "Numbering (whatever)".
> If a literal translation of "Chapter" is not meaningful for a language, then
> this can be solved in the localization.
You're flipping the majority case. It is not the common or typical case for "Chapter Numbering" to mean numbering of things which aren't chapters, in a document without chapters. My French, Dutch and German are all too poor to comment on that use in these languages, but it's certainly the exception rather than the rule.
So, what I'm suggesting is that customary use in Dutch, German and French be maintained through the localization, but that the name (in the code, and in the English UI) be returned to "Outline Numbering".
> I do not see problem S1. If I search in the help for "outline numbering" the
> link goes to the correct help page "chapter numbering". That help page might
> need a hint, why the title is not "Outline numbering".
If users need to consult the Help so as to be able to decipher the incorrect naming of the menu item - that's your problem right there.
> I do not see problem S2. It is called "chapter numbering", which implicates
> for me, that there exist already a "chapter".
That _is_ the problem - because there are no chapters, nor can we create chapters.
Naming was changed deliberately and I disagree to move back. But ticket is open for input.
Just -1 from me
A -1 from me.
-1 from me, too. If the translation to Hebrew or Arabic ca n be misunderstood, a solution would be to change that translation, but not the the English UI.
All those saying "-1" - Heiko, Roman, Dave, Dieter - what's the basis for your objection? Is there something factually incorrect in R1 through R3? Do you believe the current state of affairs is not confusing?
If not, then I fail to see the justification for the rename.
Also, to clarify - the question here is not about what should be done in localizations, where each language community calls things whatever works in their language, but rather - the unlocalized text, in English and in the source code, on the basis of which localizations are made.
Current situation might not be a perfect solution, but I don't see a better one. For me Regina pointed out the main arguments against a change. I read a couple of bug reports that came from confusion about outline numbering.
And I don't see, that a user with - let me say - three different headings in a small document with 3 pages says "I don't have real chapters (parts of a book) in my document, so I can't use this feature to number the parts of a document."
(In reply to Dieter from comment #8)
> Current situation might not be a perfect solution, but I don't see a better
It has already been established that using the name "Chapter" is not an improvement over the previous name, except perhaps in a few locales.
The better solution is reverting the name to "Outline Numbering".
> For me Regina pointed out the main arguments against a change.
I have explained why Regina's comment is - with respect - quite invalid: Using "Chapters" makes things unambiguous in English, but unambiguously wrong, which is worse than the previous state of affairs.
> I read a
> couple of bug reports that came from confusion about outline numbering.
1. With which locales? If they were about French/German/Dutch, then that's a localization issue.
2. Outline numbering has other causes for being somewhat confusing. See issue 141453.
If there are relevant bug reports, can you please put them online somewhere (pastebin?) and link to them?
> And I don't see, that a user with - let me say - three different headings in
> a small document with 3 pages says "I don't have real chapters (parts of a
> book) in my document, so I can't use this feature to number the parts of a
You are assuming the user's attention is already on this feature. It will not be because of the combination of it being in the Tools menu and it being about Chapter. You are assuming three things about the user:
1. Believes that the numbering features are to be found outside of Format | Paragraph (or even the format menu) and outside the Numbering Styles sidebar.
2. Believes they should look for a relevant feature in the Tools menu.
3. Knows that Chapter numbering will apply to sub-chapter-level elements, or in a chapterless documents.
This is unlikely. If the name is reverted, we will have removed one of the three required realizations/pieces of information a user must possess.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #7)
> All those saying "-1" - Heiko, Roman, Dave, Dieter - what's the basis for
> your objection? Is there something factually incorrect in R1 through R3? Do
> you believe the current state of affairs is not confusing?
This is bug tracking system, NOT a debating society. I find it offensive that our Bugzilla is offten abused by people who keep a "so called" bug open with pedantic arguments, in an attempt to get "their way", by a "war of attrition".
This is a decision the project has already taken, so can we please not waste any more time and effort on the NON-BUG. Close it as NOT A BUG, WON'T FIX and move on to assessing REAL bugs.
(In reply to Dave Barton from comment #10)
> This is bug tracking system, NOT a debating society.
And yet, you chose to to make a Social-Media-like "Dislike" gesture ("-1 from me").
> I find it offensive
> that our Bugzilla is offten abused by people who keep a "so called" bug open
> with pedantic arguments, in an attempt to get "their way", by a "war of
Attrition is part of how the name change was made despite objections and reservations. ("I give in..." - bug 107573 comment 19).
> This is a decision the project has already taken
It seems as though you're saying that the merit of a measure is unimportant if it has officially been adopted; and a measure can never be taken by mistake.
This bug was opened after carefully reading bug 107573, to understand the motivation for the suggestion to rename; and while you may certainly disagree with the arguments I made, I resent your implication that they are frivolous, or redundant.
We are tired of the unnecessary pedantic diatribe keeping this non-bug open.
Please do not close this bug report while the issues it raises have not been addressed. Also, speak for yourself.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #13)
> Please do not close this bug report while the issues it raises have not been
> addressed. Also, speak for yourself.
The issues have been addressed. The "fictions" bug is closed.
Eyal, I think Design-Team should decide finally in one of the next meetings. Since everybody can join it's meetings, everybody should accept the decision then. Heiko, if you disagree, please add a comment.
Eyal, you can see we all disagree with you, so please let's will not start a status changing war here
(In reply to Roman Kuznetsov from comment #16)
> Eyal, you can see we all disagree with you, so please let's will not start a
> status changing war here
The reason I have insistied on the status is that the closing did not follow from actually addressing the issues raised - and it was a closure as NOTABUG.
I will not have a status-change-war over a WONTFIX - as it is your prerogative rather than question of fact.
And just to be clear - I am appreciative of your time spent on reviewing and commenting on bugs, even when I disagree vigorously.
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #9)
> 1. Believes that the numbering features are to be found outside of Format |
> Paragraph (or even the format menu) and outside the Numbering Styles sidebar.
> 2. Believes they should look for a relevant feature in the Tools menu.
> 3. Knows that Chapter numbering will apply to sub-chapter-level elements, or
> in a chapterless documents.
All true but not directly related to the terminology of Outline vs. Chapter. We concluded somewhere else that chapter numbering should be available on the actual numbering tab in the paragraph properties dialog.
Whether Outline or Chapter, none seems to be perfectly clear without reading a documentation or doing the usual trial and error. Once you know the workflow labels are kinda inferior.
Most of us are not native speakers. The implicit translation could result in misinterpretation. I would trust in the recommendation of native speakers, which is Dave here. No offense to anyone, many of you are linguistic geniuses. A good idea, if it comes to localization questions, is to involve the l10n team. Ideally via mailing list.
We all pull together. Controversial opinions are necessary to ponder different views, and somehow we have to make a choice. I'm also not happy with every democratic decision taken in the past. But have to ask myself: is it really worth to fight?
I don't have an opinion in favor of Outline or Chapter, nor I followed in detail, but I was against the change for the sake of continuity.
Already in the beginning it was clear that this is not clear improvement. Even if some small, nor enough to do it in my opinion.
Some would be satisfied, some not. Not worth a change and 2 reports.
(In reply to Dieter from comment #15)
> Eyal, I think Design-Team should decide finally in one of the next meetings.
> Since everybody can join it's meetings, everybody should accept the decision
> then. Heiko, if you disagree, please add a comment.
I agree with Dieter.
Eyal, would it be possible for you to join the next UX Team meeting ?