Description: The to character is invisible invisible with image deselected (so quite hard to track where the anchor actually is positioned). Having they current anchor visible all the time is out of the option. However maybe similar decoration as proposed in bug 128616. So blueish anchor icon? Next question would be: can it be grabbed? Third question: should even replace they un-stylish gray square Especially with toggle formatting marks on (leaving in the middle what to do if turned off Kind of related to bug 137348 Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open Writer 2. Paste an image in it 3. Press Enter few times .. image moves down -> bug 132948 Actual Results: Image moves down, but anchor is invisible Expected Results: Anchor should be present, so you do now where it actually is Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Version: 7.1.0.0.alpha1+ (x64) Build ID: 312a33b7636334f6ce3b6d1702bc5d3e45215601 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3 Build 9600; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); UI: en-US Calc: CL
This anchor is likely an image but I cannot find it. It's not /cmd/sc_toggleanchortype.png nor svx/res/marker-anchor.png (-pressed.png). Maybe Rizal or Andreas know... and have opinions too.
There is /svx/res/markers.png which has all the marker-* stuff within one png.
(In reply to andreas_k from comment #2) > svx/res/markers.png Yes, this one changes the anchor. Opinions please if we should make it more obtrusive. An argument pro might be the blue color of the pilcrow character. Another is the dark grey color of field highlighting.
We discussed the topic in the design meeting and welcome changes to the icon. Whether or not the anchor should be colored is up to the theme.
more than just a change to icon for the anchor mark, the behavior of the 'to character' marks needs attention. Currently anchor is only visible when the images frame is selected. This enhancement requires work on the anchor objects in general with 'to character' needing attention. Anchor visibility controled via the 'Toggle Formatting Marks' (<Ctrl>+F10) seems reasonable, but there would need to be a visible distinction made to the shown anchor if the object has focus.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #5) > more than just a change to icon for the anchor mark, the behavior of the 'to > character' marks needs attention. Currently anchor is only visible when the > images frame is selected. Which is an advantage, and the reason why a more striking color is acceptable. There is no clear use case to me why always showing the anchor is desirable. And I would also separate this discussion from the icon change. The latter is simple and non-destructive (users who dislike a blueish anchor, for example, can change the theme) while binding the visibility to any existing option is changing the UX irrevocable.
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #6) > (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #5) > > more than just a change to icon for the anchor mark, the behavior of the 'to > > character' marks needs attention. Currently anchor is only visible when the > > images frame is selected. > > Which is an advantage, and the reason why a more striking color is > acceptable. There is no clear use case to me why always showing the anchor > is desirable. And I would also separate this discussion from the icon > change. The latter is simple and non-destructive (users who dislike a > blueish anchor, for example, can change the theme) while binding the > visibility to any existing option is changing the UX irrevocable. FWIW, comment 5 what I actually intended :P. They 'different anchor' was there also for aesthetically & practical reasons. * aesthetically -> Big square kind of big and ugly (however easy to select and drag) and not in line with toggle formatting color * Practically: if toggle on would show anchors all they time, parts of they they text would be hidden behind an anchor. So more transparent png should be used not overlapping text (clickable area could stay the same I expect, but would need testing) So Heiko kind of hijacking my bug/ or nicely said.. implementing a part of they suggestion :P. Not sure if there is a new bug needed for discussion on they other part Not knowing where 'to character' anchors are quite unpractical sometimes (as comment 5)
Stuart: assuming you added UX mistakenly. We discussed the topic before and your input adds an aspect but I don't see it to start a new discussion. In any case my take is to have this ticket as easy hack (changing the icon) and if needed another for discussing the workflow.
@Heiko, no it was intentional. There was some misunderstanding of the issue as it was poorly stated. Thus it was not an easy hack. An adjustment to the icon was tangential. There is a substantive UX issue here for efficiently exposing the object anchors when the specific object (here the containing Frame of an image, or for Draw objects) is not selected active. Obviously continue to show the anchor and its dimension outlines on the canvas rulers *when selected*; but show the anchors for all objects with the other formatting marks when toggled enabled. Such exposure would provide visual hints as to content layout on canvas--more immediately needed with broader move to as-character/to-character anchoring and suppression of to-page anchoring. The whole class of anchors need to be better exposed visually on canvas--the <ctrl>+F10 toggle of formatting marks seems a reasonable control. While the individual anchor "types" should probably be labeled and color coded.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #9) Agreeing on every point.. and sorry for my poor bug report quality.. > The whole class of anchors need to be better exposed visually on canvas--the > <ctrl>+F10 toggle of formatting marks seems a reasonable control. While the > individual anchor "types" should probably be labeled and color coded. Like the idea. However, what about color blind people? Or other visual impairments? Note: doesn't mean I say the whole idea should be dropped as it useful for most. However some alternative/additional solution would be appreciated by the minority. Off-topic: Do we have an accessibility mailing list or something? So people with the actual impairment may have say in certain topics/ get informed about those? So they can contribute? There where some complains on the mailing list about accessibility .. and they probably look at things a different way.
*** Bug 155249 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***