Bug 157331 - in automatic filter, add the number of the first row where the value appears
Summary: in automatic filter, add the number of the first row where the value appears
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Calc (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
unspecified
Hardware: All All
: medium enhancement
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: needsUXEval
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2023-09-19 14:21 UTC by hector
Modified: 2023-11-03 09:01 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments
example (149.70 KB, image/jpeg)
2023-10-19 12:38 UTC, hector
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description hector 2023-09-19 14:21:03 UTC
Description:
when using autofilters, i will like to see next to the values from de list, the first  row number where these value appears, and also when it is a error.

this is beacause, i think, it will be easy and better, to go to this particular row, instead of aplying autofilter, verify the value show or the error  

i dont know how lcalc create the value list of the autofilter.

i work, whit large documents, whit formulas, so aplying autofilters, and then removing it, sometimes freeze de lcalc.

Actual Results:
today autofilters, show a value list

Expected Results:
that autofilter, next to the value, also shows the row of that particular value.


Reproducible: Always


User Profile Reset: No

Additional Info:
idont know
Comment 1 Stéphane Guillou (stragu) 2023-10-04 20:46:07 UTC
In my opinion, this is is an unnecessary addition to the Autofilter, and if implemented, would not be a self-explanatory bit of information.
I think a count of each value, requested in bug 149984, is more useful, and what most people would understand such a number to be.

As a workaround: use the Seach and Replace dialog, or the quick search toolbar with Ctrl + F.

UX/Design team, opinion?
Comment 2 Heiko Tietze 2023-10-17 12:07:51 UTC
(In reply to Stéphane Guillou (stragu) from comment #1)
> would not be a self-explanatory bit of information.
> I think a count of each value, requested in bug 149984, is more useful
+1

I don't understand what "when it is a error" means. Could you please elaborate?
Comment 3 hector 2023-10-17 13:53:59 UTC
When any value in the list gives an error, that's what I mean.

A user proposed the find/replace function from the drop-down menu.

but it is not very comfortable.

My proposal is for convenience, to identify the row where the first record appears that has the value shown in the autofilter record list.


If you already have to put together the list that it shows you in memory, it is also very complicated to show the row where that first value/error/not available appears
Comment 4 QA Administrators 2023-10-18 03:15:16 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 5 Heiko Tietze 2023-10-18 08:02:27 UTC
(In reply to hector from comment #3)
> When any value in the list gives an error, that's what I mean.
> 
> A user proposed the find/replace function from the drop-down menu.
> 
> but it is not very comfortable.
> 
> My proposal is for convenience, to identify the row where the first record
> appears that has the value shown in the autofilter record list.
> 
> 
> If you already have to put together the list that it shows you in memory, it
> is also very complicated to show the row where that first value/error/not
> available appears

Can you share an example?
Comment 6 hector 2023-10-19 12:38:59 UTC
Created attachment 190298 [details]
example
Comment 7 QA Administrators 2023-10-20 03:15:33 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 8 Heiko Tietze 2023-10-20 08:35:06 UTC
(In reply to hector from comment #6)
> Created attachment 190298 [details]
> example

Filter starts at E4 and the row/value example assumes E1, which makes the first occurrence of 0 in (E)9.

Given we want to show the total number of results (bug 149984) there is not much room for other information. I also doubt it's enough to just know where a particular value comes first, you probably want to modify it (eg. jump to the error in order to fix it). It sounds as if you reinvent a (quick)find functionality. Anyway, up for more opinions (mine if WF).
Comment 9 Heiko Tietze 2023-11-03 09:01:53 UTC
We discussed the topic in the design meeting and suggest to ask in a forum/ask-libreoffice for better solutions - and request an enhancement if none is found. While the computational effort sounds to be low, and real estate on dialog seems to be possible though somewhat cluttered we should not implement such enhancement if not more users are interested.

Please reopen in this case.