When I insert an OLE object (from file) and choose to display it - I can't choose an icon for that object. I should be able to do so.
Why do you need to change the icon? It just indicates an OLE object, and if you want to show an image and link a document to it, that should be possible too.
PS: The symbol is actually the MIME type icon taken from the icon theme during creation of the link.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #1) > Why do you need to change the icon? Because it appears in the document, and I want other people to see an icon which corresponds to the OLE object's content. > It just indicates an OLE object I don't see why the word "just" belongs in that sentence... > , and if you want to show an image and link a document to it, > that should be possible too. The object is not a document. But regardless - I fail to see the UX distinction between inserting an object and controlling the image/icon "holding" this link, and inserting an image and linking an object to it. If you can choose the image and the object here, you should be able to choose them both there. One could claim these should be the same action, but I'm not making that claim, and if you want to - I believe that's outside the scope of this ticket.
The icon does follow the MIME type of the document. => NAB
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #4) > The icon does follow the MIME type of the document. => NAB That's the problem. They shouldn't follow the MIME type, because the user often (usually?) doesn't want to focus on the file type, but on the contents. Not to mention how MIME types sometimes have a generic icon associated with them. If you'd like to mark this as an enhancement - I can accept that.
I'm against this enhancement proposal.
I guess that if we were to accept another icon, we'd accept any other image. So the feature should also be renamed.
Created attachment 193985 [details] Writer document after adding a PDF document as icon This is the blank(ish) gray icon I get after adding a PDF file as an OLE object, displayed as an icon. Version: 24.8.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 3f2d56d486da2006e24444cfa6f2f63700a14fae CPU threads: 4; OS: Linux 6.6; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: he-IL (en_IL); UI: en-US Desktop environment: Cinnamon
Created attachment 193986 [details] Actual icons for PDFs on same system as attachment 193985 [details] ... and these are the PDF icons the desktop environment's file manager (Nemo) uses.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #6) > I'm against this enhancement proposal. Now that you see what the icon looks like, are you still against it?
I against an icon picker where a different theme would be the solution. Of course not for this particular item but in general. Otherwise you need to make clear why OLE objects are special. Besides, why not show a thumbnail preview as we do on the start center?
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #11) > I against an icon picker where a different theme would be the solution. It would not be a solution either. The user may be ok with the theme's icon - but they may _not_ be. * Perhaps I have three PDFs, and I want to represent them as "the blue document", "the red document" and "the green document" with some icons of mine? * Perhaps I have my own icon theme I use in the document for different types of files? * Perhaps I want the icons used to fit the desktop environment which I and my readers may share? > Of > course not for this particular item but in general. Otherwise you need to > make clear why OLE objects are special. Special relative to what? > Besides, why not show a thumbnail preview as we do on the start center? 1. Because the user didn't indicate they want that to happen. 2. Because thumbnails are often useless (e.g. audio, many kinds of multi-page documents, or even a textual document with no special distinguishing features) 3. (Last and least) because we don't have that feature right now; it's either an icon or a 100%-zoom view, IIANM
So just insert your image and link it to the document. Image > Properties > Hyperlink, open per ctrl+click.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #13) > So just insert your image and link it to the document. Image > Properties > > Hyperlink, open per ctrl+click. Before considering that possibility: What if I don't want to link, but to embed?
Embed but don't show? Use a master document.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #15) > Embed but don't show? Use a master document. Great, so, it seems like by this logic we can drop the "show icon" option altogether :-) More seriously, though, that's not at all like showing an icon. And a hyperlink is not one of the document's external links. Given that the "show icon" option exists - we must allow changing the icon, as the default choice cannot be assumed to be satisfactory.
Given that we have a spec that defines clearly what belongs to the external-file-object this is a WF.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #17) > Given that we have a spec that defines clearly what belongs to the > external-file-object this is a WF. I don't see how the conclusion of that sentence follows from the premise...
To make the document content platform and application agnostic, you need to define the property in the specification.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #19) > To make the document content platform and application agnostic, you need to > define the property in the specification. Ah, you're saying there's nothing in the spec which allows us to specify an icon as an alternative to the default?