Issue 85534 - Document view jumps back to cursor position when saving
Summary: Document view jumps back to cursor position when saving
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of issue 22453
Alias: None
Product: Writer
Classification: Application
Component: save-export (show other issues)
Version: OOo 2.3
Hardware: All Linux, all
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: stefan.baltzer
QA Contact: issues@sw
URL:
Keywords: oooqa
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-01-23 23:51 UTC by modir
Modified: 2008-07-15 21:32 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description modir 2008-01-23 23:51:06 UTC 
Whenever I save a document the current visible page jumps to where the mouse
cursor was. Instead of just staying where it is.

How to reproduce:
1. Open a document with several pages (e.g. 10)
2. Set the mouse cursor somewhere on page 3 and edit a few words.
3. Scroll down to e.g. page 7.
4. Press CTRL + S (or the save button)
Now the current view jumps back to page 3. This is highly disturbing if I want
to proof-read a document and just save it once in a while. Then I always jump
around and don't know anymore where I was.

(Sorry, if I took the wrong subcomponent. Didn't know exactly which one to take.)
Comment 1 michael.ruess 2008-01-28 15:13:10 UTC 
Reassigned to SBA.
Comment 2 kpalagin 2008-01-30 20:25:52 UTC 
I was able to reproduce this behavior exactly once out of approx five attempts.
Comment 3 modir 2008-01-30 23:24:21 UTC 
at least once. a good start :)

Another way to test it is with the Highlighting-function. Start with
highlighting some words on page 3 and then go on to page 4 and 5 and highlight
some words there as well. If you press then CTRL + S you will jump back to page
3 as well.

(This could be another bug, code-wise not related to this one. But I have the
feeling is the same bug)
Comment 4 richlv 2008-04-02 11:25:22 UTC 
seems to be a dupe of 22453
Comment 5 modir 2008-04-02 11:41:03 UTC 
You are right. After reading the comments in the other bug report I think as
well that this is a dupe.
Comment 6 lohmaier 2008-07-15 21:31:40 UTC 
flagging and closing as duplicate

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 22453 ***
Comment 7 lohmaier 2008-07-15 21:32:10 UTC 
thanks for the link to the other issue.