This a particularly necessary when the lines are very short, e.g., for 2 spaces, for a space and a comma. Current thickness is easy to miss. A thicker line would also help when checking with the dialog box. Sometimes we need more context than what is shown in the d.box to make a decision. When the line is short, it's frustratingly difficult to find the flagged words in the document. So, a thicker line would be very helpful.
reverting status to UNCONFIRMED since there was no independent confirmation by other users. I'm not convinced about your request, so please post a screenshot of one of the cases you describe to persuade me that the spellchecker wavy line is not easy to see.
Created attachment 108080 [details] Hunt Squiggly
(In reply to tommy27 from comment #1) > I'm not convinced about your request, so please post a screenshot of one of > the cases you describe to persuade me that the spellchecker wavy line is not > easy to see. Please see attached. It's no doubt prompted by my weakening eyesight. Thus, it's a request for an option to make it thicker.
Ok, from an ACCESSIBILITY point of view your request is legitimate. having the thickness configurable by the user would not harm anyone. people who like the current thickness would keep the current value, while people with eyesight problems could benefit from a thicker value status NEW. edited summary notes
Yes. Thank you very much. :) _/\_
I agree with the request to add a way to thicken the wavvy line for spell checking in LibreOffice. I have misspelled "wavy" while I am entering this text and I see it as more prominent in this text editor than I would see it in LibreOffice. Keep in mind that higher resolution monitors (2560 x 1440) can resolve a very thin line and it is barely noticable at that very fine size, especially for us old guys.
It would be nice to see this happening. The problem is that the marking has no relation with the text size and/or zoom level. It's always one pixel height. The larger the resolution the more difficult it is to be seen. If this cannot be setup, then make it at least relative to say 10pt/100% zoom (minimal of 1px is ok, though subpixeling would be also an option). At least that way people may zoom in to see the markings if they need to. To bring this problem to numbers. A 15" wide screen laptop with a resolution of 1920x1080 (is fairly common and what I'm using now) has pixel size of about 180µm (20cm/1080px). That's as large as a thick human hair. You don't need to have eye problems to need this setup option; just use a high resolution screen. So this is barely an ACCESSIBILITY problem. (And don't ask for a screen shot, you'll still see that in your resolution with different PPIs) - by the way, new laptops (3200x1800@15,6"-16:9) have a pixel height of 100µm.
(In reply to estani from comment #7) > It would be nice to see this happening. The problem is that the marking has > no relation with the text size and/or zoom level. It's always one pixel > height. <snip> > You don't need to have eye problems to need this setup option; just use a > high resolution screen. > > So this is barely an ACCESSIBILITY problem. I think you've just made it clear that this merits attention. Perhaps we can consider this as more than an enhancement request.
Despite having been opened almost SIX years from now and found legitimate to fix one year after, this issue still hasn't been considered. Even if this parameter may be found too minor to deserve an UI access, could we at least have some way to address it?
Adding needsUXEval to get the design team on board. I support the request that especially for short Terms of single characters it's hard to see the red line. But I don't see an option as a good solution. The default settings should fulfill accessibility and UX guidelines without any user action.
