Cross-references are somewhat complex, and so is their inserting dialog. The items on the "Type" list differ greatly in what they mean / what it means to insert them; one may perceive redundancy between the list of reference-able items and the menu entitled "Insert Reference To". The Help page does explain these things (help/en-US/text/swriter/01/04090002.html), but I think it would be useful to have tooltips for the different items in the "Type" and "Insert Reference To" listboxes, with an abridged version of their explanatory text.
Wouldn't add too much of the documentation into the program. Tooltips are good to explain very short labels but must not replace the help. Other opinions?
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1) > Tooltips are good to explain very short labels but must not replace the help. Agreed, but those are short labels, which could use a 1-sentence/2-sentence explanation. Not suggesting anything beyond that.
In general, I find it disturbing when tooltips pop up in any place of the UI. It's well known for example in toolbars. Especially I didn't like tooltips in lists where the tooltip pops up during moving the mouse of the list items automatically and then the tooltip itself covers other list items so that they are not visible anymore. Then you have to move away the mouse to have an full overview again ... The "Type" list should be self-explanatory in my opinion. Is it really necessary to have tooltips here? I doubt. The "Insert reference to" list is different. Here I support a better description as it's not really well classifiable. (What's the difference of Number, Number (no context) and Number (full context)? Why is the most important list item "Reference" not on top of the list and why is it called so? etc.)
(In reply to Thomas Lendo from comment #4) > In general, I find it disturbing when tooltips pop up in any place of the > UI. But aren't you the "odd person out" about this point?? I mean, they shouldn't pop up immediately, but tooltips are widely used in LO > It's well known for example in toolbars. Especially I didn't like > tooltips in lists where the tooltip pops up during moving the mouse of the > list items automatically and then the tooltip itself covers other list items > so that they are not visible anymore. Then you have to move away the mouse > to have an full overview again ... I'd say that's more about tooltip delay and behavior on movement than its very existence. > > The "Type" list should be self-explanatory in my opinion. Is it really > necessary to have tooltips here? I doubt. It _should_, but it isn't; and even if we rephrased it as I suggest it would still be somewhat cryptic. I'm suggesting we compensate for that somewhat. > The "Insert reference to" list is different. Here I support a better > description as it's not really well classifiable. (What's the difference of > Number, Number (no context) and Number (full context)? Why is the most > important list item "Reference" not on top of the list and why is it called > so? etc.) So, my rename bug 141869 indeed touches on those issues, but same point - accesible explanation is called for IMHO.
(In reply to Thomas Lendo from comment #3) > In general, I find it disturbing when tooltips pop up in any place... > The "Type" list should be self-explanatory... So no tooltip on the frame label "Type" and "Insert reference to" and with bug 141869 we introduce better terms for the list content. Putting all together your take is WF - and I agree.