Reassigned to BH

The method of applying outline numbering in OOo Writer is very confusing.  On
the one hand, you can achieve it by applying numbering schemes with the Stylist
through use of Numbering Styles (Format->Stylist->Numbering Styles
button->Modify[style]->Position and Options tabs).  These allow specification of
different numbering styles for the ten outline levels possible in Writer,
complete with particular indent arrangements for each of these outline levels. 
This effectively provides a method of applying a document hierarchy with
existing styles: both paragraph and numbering styles.  A great deal of
flexibility is gained from the ability to attach various pre-defined Numbering
Styles to various Paragraph Styles through the Numbering tab in
Format->Stylist->Modify[style].

However, when it comes to doing Outline Numbering according to the Help
documents, you are told to use Tools->Outline Numbering.  In this dialog, you
select which style applies to which level, and you are forced to enter the
position and numbering details for these styles, despite having Numbering Styles
designed for that purpose at your disposal.  The user is forced to put in
repetitive outline numbering schemes which causes confusion - why do I have to
do this when I've already done this elsewhere?  The OOo Documentation HOWTO -
http://documentation.openoffice.org/HOW_TO/word_processing/02en_numbering_howto.sxw
- *specifically* instructs users that when organising 'Hierarchical Numbering'
they must not: 1. include numbering under the tab Numbering, nor 2. choose the
style Numbering in the Stylist.  This restriction removes all the benefit from
being able to assign Numbering Styles to Paragraph styles.  It also begs the
question as to why outline numbering was provided for through Numbering Styles,
when the first thing you're told to do with 'Hierarchical Numbering' is to turn
it off.  Very confusing.

I think the confusion comes from the way Table of Contents (TOC) generation has
been implemented in Writer.  Outline numbering using Styles - including the use
of Numbering Styles - works reasonably well until you want to implement a TOC in
a document.  To do this, OOo designers introduced the Tools->Outline Numbering
dialog which confused 'Document Outline' with 'Outline Numbering' used in
paragraph styles.  For a TOC, all that was needed was a place for the user to
specify, for the TOC generator's use, the *styles* (ie, plural) to be used as
the heading hierarchy to be displayed in the TOC.  So, instead of Tools->Outline
Numbering, Tools->Document Outline could have been implemented instead, with a
dialog simply collecting information on which styles were to apply to each level
displayed in the TOC.  The numbering schemes involving Position and Options
variations would simply be applied from the styles' Numbering tab.  Allowing
multiple styles to be specified for each TOC hierarchy level would allow one
style to be used as a title of the main body of a document, and another style to
be used as a title of an Appendix, say.  The representation of each title in the
TOC could then use the numbering specified for their respective styles.  About
the only option I could think for this Tools->Document Outline dialog - apart
from specifying the styles for each level, would be whether the specified
numbering scheme for each style was to be used in the TOC listing.  This would
be for flexibility for the occasions where you didn't want the paragraph
numbering used in the TOC listing, just the text from the paragraph.

This IssueZilla request to allow multiple styles in Document Outlines is the
crux of fixing outline numbering in Writer.  The utility of very flexible
Numbering Styles attached to Paragraph Styles would not be crippled as it is
now, repetitive entries of numbering schemes would be avoided, the Document
Outline dialog would be simplified greatly, and confusion would be removed. 
This one step could turn Outline Numbering from being Writer's greatest handicap
to its greatest asset.

izhaki, could you please see whether your problem is addressed in Issue 5058?
Thanks.

Issue 5058 is about CVS Access. Are you sure you're referring to the right issue?

Sorry! That's Issue 5038. Thanks.

It is, pretty much the same... Funny that I've missed this issue when I was
looking for this equivelent issues before creating this one...

Shame that issue 5038 was submited nearly 2 years ago, and its status is still
new...

Well, with more than 25thousand Issues it's not surprising that some can be
overlooked. Add your votes to Issue 5038, that's the only thing we can do to
speed up the process of implementing the enhancement.

I will close this then as a duplicate.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 5038 ***

.