● The Writer cursor is difficult to see in a pageful of text. ● After a search, the found string (It could a single character, like $, α or ©) can also be difficult to see in a pageful of text. All text editors (NotePad, NotePad++, PSPad, SciTE, …) have a currentLine —very convenient! Why not Writer? Because it's not just another ‘plain-text editor’? Because MSWord does not? (Does it? I don't know about that.) It should be easy to display the currentLine with a special, customizable combination fore|background colours which would, by-default, be the text colour pair, to please the users who like the current presentation —indistinguishable currentLine. The current character would have the text colour pair, automatically contrasted with the currentLine. In fact, there should be TWO currentLines; the 2nd one to track the mouse cursor, off if said cursor is out of the Writer window, indistinguishable if the user so chooses.
Would require considerble dev work, and questionable for achieving consistent implementation cross platform. Don't see much value, especially as all os/DE allow you to adjust text cursor 'weight' which LO honors. IMHO => WF
(In reply to TorrAB from comment #0) > Because it's not just another ‘plain-text editor’? This would be my argument. It overwrites the paragraph/character formatting and can be quite distracting.
Also for WF: Hard to implement, usefulness for most users unclear. If the window has focus, the cursor blinks, which makes it usually easy to find as peripheral vision is rather sensitive to movement.
Also for WF. Another trick to see where the cursor is would be to switch on the background colour.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #1) > Would require considerble dev work, and questionable for achieving > consistent implementation cross platform. ● Is a ‘consistent implementation cross platform’ necessary? It could be implement on two or three major platorms for, let's say, 80% of users, and extended later if the other 20% see the benefits and demand it.
We discussed this topic in the design meeting and recommend to not implement. Writer is meant to be WYSIWYG and changing the line color even slightly contradicts this effort. Text editors provide this functionality very well.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #2) > (In reply to TorrAB from comment #0) > > Because it's not just another ‘plain-text editor’? > > This would be my argument. It overwrites the paragraph/character formatting ● No, it does not. Heading 3 remains Heading 3, FirstLineIndent remains FirstLineIndent, Italic remains Italic, Arial remains Arial, etc. Only the fore|background colours would be changed — without affecting the document, obviously. > and can be quite distracting ● The colour combination would be customizable, from ‘loud’ to soft, or indistinguishable currentLine.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #6) > We discussed this topic in the design meeting and recommend to not > implement. Writer is meant to be WYSIWYG. ● ‘What you see is what you get’ does not apply at the editing stage: you ‘see’ the cursor when you edit, but you don't ‘get’ it in the document; you ‘see’ the blue background of your edit window, but you don't ‘get’ it in the document; you ‘see’ a string highlight (eg, in a search), but you don't ‘get’ it in the document. Same for the currentLine: you will ‘see’ it (easily, thank-you very much!), but you won't ‘get’ it in the document. So, ‘changing the line color’ during editing does not ‘contradicts this effort’. > Text editors provide this functionality very well. ● Right. So, you are telling LO users to go and use their favorite text editors if they want to enjoy this functionality…
(In reply to Gerhard Weydt from comment #4) > Also for WF. Another trick to see where the cursor is would be to switch on > the background colour. ● What does ‘switch on the background colour’ mean?
(In reply to TorrAB from comment #7) > > and can be quite distracting > ● The colour combination would be customizable, from ‘loud’ to soft, or > indistinguishable currentLine. Valid arguments but still likely to be seen by many as feature creep.