For a drawing object - the two phrases "Word-wrap text in shape" and "Resize shape to fit object" are contradictory: Either the size is fixed and the text is adapted to it, or the text is fixed and the size is adapted to it. However - we can toggle both of them independently. The state of both of them being toggled is that: * The object _width_ is set arbitrarily by the user * The text wraps according to object width (usual "Word-wrap text in shape) * The object _height_ is adjust to fit the height of the wrapped text. This is both surprising and confusing. In fact, the two toggles are not semantically adequate for representing the possible states w.r.t. wrapping and resizing height and width. We should have something else, e.g.: * A 4-option drop-down list * Labels regarding resizing will change when text wrapping is eableed. * Something else
Indeed makes not much sense. But the exact text depends a lot on the kind of drawing object, see bug 114924 comment 2. Regina, what do you think?
Prior UX musings on see also bug 114924
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #0) > "Resize shape to fit object" I meant "Resize shape to fit text" of course.
We discussed the topic in the design meeting. As this depends on the kind of object any solution might not be fully satisfying. Recommendation is to not put effort into this. And make it a duplicate of bug 114924, which has been resolved WFM.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #4) > We discussed the topic in the design meeting. As this depends on the kind of > object any solution might not be fully satisfying. Suppose that the actions depend on the type of object. Well, that does not mean there won't be a satisfying solution, it just means that the solution should take this into account. For example - and I'm not saying this is necessarily the best option - suppose we had a drop-down list of behaviors. The set of list items might be different for shapes and for text-boxes. But the current situation, in which the user can't understand what the behavior would be by reading the check box labels, and has to perform trial-and-error to explore different behaviors, is not acceptable - a UI bug IMNSHO.
Reviewed WFM bug 114924 against enhancement request here, this *is* functionally a dupe in that enhancement to normalize behavior of controlling "object resize" vs. "inscribed text wrapping" would require too extensive refactoring of object classes. Current handling in UI is sufficient, => WFM as noted bug 114924.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #6) > Reviewed WFM bug 114924 against enhancement request here, There is no enhancement request here. The current UI is buggy - and it doesn't WFM.