Description: The new "Toolbars" dialogue offers multiple choices at once, but the user may not quickly understand that. I was looking for where the new feature is, and for quite a while I didn't recognize it. (Yes, I'm slow--but I suppose I'm not the only one.) After all, there’s already a “Toolbars” item in the main menu, and it pulls up a list to choose from that looks the same. So how is the new “Toolbars” menu different from that one? A user like me may be slow to catch on. So perhaps the "Toolbars" button could be labeled "Toolbars (multiple choice)". That would make the purpose of the dialogue at once clear. An alternative way to handle this would be to put an instruction within the toolbar dialogue itself: Here you can select or unselect multiple toolbars. ☐ 3D Settings ☐ Align Objects ☐ [Etc.] Of course, one could do both: rename the button and add the instruction. (The more clarity, the better.) Steps to Reproduce: 1.In the main menu, click on "Views" and then "User Interface." 2. 3. Actual Results: The button for the "Toolbars" feature is labeled "Toolbars". But I was slow to see that this was where I could choose *multiple* toolbars. Expected Results: Clearer communication of what the "Toolbars" dialogue is for. Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: Yes Additional Info: Version: 26.2.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 33560caa34a6532fb27641c19d7cc3bb4dc33057 CPU threads: 16; OS: Linux 6.15; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded There may be documentation I should have seen that's related to this issue But if so I couldn't find it.
(In reply to j.a.swami from comment #0) > The new "Toolbars" dialogue offers multiple choices at once, but the user > may not quickly understand that. I don't think this will be an issue for many users. And you immediately see the effect (toolbars appear or become hidden). Adding static text to describe the UI is always a bad idea; renaming might be an option but I still see no need nor a solution. My take: NAB/WF. > There may be documentation I should have seen that's related to this issue > But if so I couldn't find it. Resolved for bug 167111.