|
|
duplicate of 0003422 |
|
|
It's even worse. If a freehand line is edited in the "Shape" tab, the object is still selected after finishing the "Edit shape" operation, but the PP switches back to"X, Y, Z" anyway. |
|
|
the problem was best described in 0003422 : If you have properties open for some object on a particular tab, say text properties, and click on the document window to deselect the object before selecting another, the properties box resets to the first tab. This may be to ensure that it's on a valid tab no matter what is selected next or something, but it's inconvenient if you have a group of text boxes selected looking at the text properties tab and want to switch to viewing only one. (At least, the only way I know to do that is deselect all and then select one again.) It would be nice to have it stay on the text tab until an object is selected for which that is not valid and then switch back to the first, which is what happens if you directly select an image box, say, after a text box. 0003422 was closed and supposed to be solved for 1.3.3.4cvs but the problem is still here with the 1.3.6 svn. |
|
|
Proposition of a better behaviour : - For each type of selected object (image, text frame, line, ...), take note and remember the opened pane. - When selecting a new object, open the remembered pane for that type of object : the previously opened pane for the last object of the same type. |
|
|
since the panes are mutual exclusive, i think that it would be better to have only one pane for group, text, and image (and eventually a pane also for the render frames). it may be called "content" or "properties"... and scribus should not change the focused tab when changing item. |
|
|
Has this been forgotten because it’s 1.3.4? Were are we? |
|
|
No, it hasn't been forgotten, but it requires a significant rewrite of major parts of the Scribus code. Thus, we won't see this in 1.4, unfortunately. |
|
|
Not an issue in 1.5.2svn r21170 Still an issue in 1.4.6 because tab defaults back to PP > XYZ when you click off the object. Do we want to backport ? |
|
|
click-off-issue.gif (977,043 bytes) |
|
|
works for me in 1.5.x should we close this? |
|
|
We can indeed close this. |
- Anonymous
