https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168059
--- Comment #10 from V Stuart Foote <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #9) > Past 26.2 the order was: Position and Size, Options, Wrap, Hyperlink, > Rotation, Crop, Borders, Area, Transparency, Macro. > > Changes to the order have different reasons and were not done intentionally. > > I suggest to reinstate this order and perhaps rename Options to > Accessibility (I wonder if we had this question before, Stuart DYR?). Dug around and no prior discussion of the Image -> Properties -> Options tab as holding only Accessibility aspects and renaming. Don't think rename is necessary, potentially other aspects of an image could be recorded there (e.g. what filters have been applied, or what original path or OLE it represents). Not implemented of course but no reason to rename from Options to Accessibility. As to reordering of the Dialog tabs, questions of consistency and legacy. The sequence has organically developed since StarOffice era. No record of OOo or AOO or LO effort to normalize the Tab order for the dialogs--and what we have is reasonable and familiar for users. A massive change would be change for change's sake with no real benefits or UX improvement. It would also be a documentation nightmare. If we were looking to do a massive change, alphabetical is probably not feasible, as those would have to be localized. Note: we do alphabetize and localize for the Toolbar (tb) control customization selection listboxes--but otherwise the ordering of the tb are as static as the dialog tab order. I suppose a case could be made that sequence/groupings of Toolbar button controls AND Dialog Tab order ought to be more closely aligned, but that also would be counter to legacy and familiarity and ultimately poor UX outcome. Believe all this "churn" comes only upon implementation of the Vertical tabs (VT) for dialogs feature--which I believe is progressing well and incrementally with minimal impact on UX. Keeping the legacy tab ordering is probably more appropriate for best UX outcome, and avoids the documentation and localization effort. Minor adjustments of course, but just NO for some grand reshuffling. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
