When reporting a bug you should "Write the expected behavior and the actual behavior", per https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugReport
Here there's no expected behavior, so: how else could this be done and why? Maybe page number or header/footer shouldn't be printed at all. 
I tried MSO, it doesn't let you print selection from multiple pages.

I expect correct page numbers are printed

Please attach a multi-page document, select text across pages and print selection only, and attach image how page numbers should look (you may add not on printscreen). 
The only thing that comes to mind is to have sth. like "1, 3, 7".

I don't understand, with a document which has 86 pages, the screenshot I could attach simply would have 86 on all pages.

I expect that if the selection goes from page 33 to page 35, the numbers 33, 34, 35 appear on the printed pages

Created attachment 124084 [details]
example document

Created attachment 124085 [details]
selection printed from example document

Instead of page number, say 3, it would be nice if there were "Selection from pages 1, 2, 3" because it's not pages 1, 2, 3 that are printed, but some selection out of them. 
I don't know whether this is possible, so let's wait for someone to confirm.

I'm not UX, but I think Timur's suggestion from comment 7 makes a lot of sense, so I'm setting this to NEW in the meantime.

I would assume that it would print brand new pages numbers starting from 1, as a selection has no page boundaries and would likely be similar to copying and pasting that selection into a new document and then printing.

At first I thought it would be cool if each page listed all the pages its content came from, but I understand it's somewhat tricky, and not everyone might like it (not to mention pathological cases, like selecting dozens of lines from different pages).
Starting from 1 seems feasible.

(In reply to Yousuf Philips (jay) from comment #10)
> I would assume that it would print brand new pages numbers starting from 1,
> as a selection has no page boundaries and would likely be similar to copying
> and pasting that selection into a new document and then printing.

That would be my expectation as well.

Seems the print selection filter is not correctly handling the Document data fields--rather than recalculating for just the "print selection", it is assigning the values from the entire document.

The page count is from Statistics -> Pages field. The page number is from the Page -> Page numbers--IIUC the page number is a moving pointer to the next page to be assigned at the end of the source document, so end up the same for the print selection.

Find that if fields for other document Statistics are included in the selection--they also are not recalculated to match the selection, and print with incorrect values. So in addition to Pages, at least Paragraphs, Words, and Characters are likewise incorrect for the print selection.

When a selection of pages (like 2-3 or 2,4) is printed the page number is exported correctly. So why should a selection start with 1? (And actually it takes the last page number in my test.) The trick is that you can select parts of page 1 and something from page 3 etc., which is combined together into a new page. So I agree with Jay and Stuart that starting new with 1 is the best choice.

Removing needsUX now.

Please add keyword 'needsUXEval' and CC 'libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org' if input from UX is needed.

Dear Paolo Benvenuto,

To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.

There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.

If you have time, please do the following:

Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/

If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
 
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.

Please DO NOT

Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not 
appropriate in this case)


If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword


Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa

Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!

Warm Regards,
QA Team

MassPing-UntouchedBug