Bug 455115

None of your suggestions make much sense really, except the last one, for which there's a separate wish i think.

(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #1)
> None of your suggestions make much sense really

Well, they would extremely help me (and thus probably many other people as well).
Why do you think this is not the case?

I would not need to switch focus constantly.
I would not need to keep the mouse focuses.

What suggestion do you have to simplify this workflow?

Some video games rely on mouse hover tooltips, and therefore show them instantly.
It would (probably) be possible to do the same for annotation tooltips in Okular.

Okular should not rely on tooltips, because there are also touchscreen users.
So I think the last suggestion makes more sense, where comments are always displayed somewhere.

Until any of that is implemented, I suggest you enable the focus policy “Focus follows mouse”, which is a setting somewhere in the window behavior.
That saves you at least one click.

(In reply to Albert Zeyer from comment #2)
> (In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #1)
> > None of your suggestions make much sense really
> 
> Well, they would extremely help me (and thus probably many other people as
> well).
> Why do you think this is not the case?

Because Okular is a desktop application using well known desktop application patterns like tooltips, and you're suggesting to change how tooltips behave just because you're using the wrong tool to do what you want to do.

> 
> I would not need to switch focus constantly.
> I would not need to keep the mouse focuses.
> 
> What suggestion do you have to simplify this workflow?

Nothing, your workflow is your problem, "I now need to go through about 5000 such review notes, and for each of it I basically need to copy & paste it into a separate (Latex editor) at the right place. " is not something normal people do, and it's not something Okular should strive to make easier by breaking well established patterns on how apps work.

You should not be doing that either, If you need to do something 5000 times, you need to find a way to automate it, not do it by hand.

> Because Okular is a desktop application using well known desktop application
> patterns like tooltips, and you're suggesting to change how tooltips behave
> just because you're using the wrong tool to do what you want to do.
> 
> ... your workflow is your problem, "I now need to go through about 5000
> such review notes, and for each of it I basically need to copy & paste it
> into a separate (Latex editor) at the right place. " is not something normal
> people do, and it's not something Okular should strive to make easier by
> breaking well established patterns on how apps work.

My university department payed for a professional proofreading service to check my PhD thesis. They told me this is the standard procedure to use Adobe tools to put in annotations for each correction.

This does not sound like such an uncommon workflow for me.

When I open it in Acrobat Reader, it also displays in a nice way, showing all the corrections in the comment/review section, permanently, not just in a tooltip. Additionally, the tooltip behavior is actually close to what I described. E.g. it shows instantly without delay.
(Although I'm not saying that the experience is perfect here. I'm not a fan of Acrobat Reader. Actually I usually would prefer Okular.)

So, to me it looks like this is clearly Okular which is behaving in a wrong and suboptimal way here.

Also, I don't really see this argument that it is more important to stick exactly to standard desktop tooltip behavior and don't care about what behavior would actually be useful to show annotations. It does not have to follow the standard desktop tooltip behavior.

Maybe the proofreading service should directly have edited my Latex files and send me a patch file? I don't know what the standard procedure is in this business. But they are really not doing this for the first time.

From reading the description of your workflow it seems that your last suggestion (having the annotation texts visible/accessible from the review pane, in the side bar) seems most helpful.  In an ideal world you would even be able to navigate there with the keyboard alone, for increased speed.

Would you be able to code such a feature?

(In reply to Oliver Sander from comment #6)
> From reading the description of your workflow it seems that your last
> suggestion (having the annotation texts visible/accessible from the review
> pane, in the side bar) seems most helpful.  In an ideal world you would even
> be able to navigate there with the keyboard alone, for increased speed.
> 
> Would you be able to code such a feature?

In principle yes, but I'm not familiar at all with the code, nor any KDE projects code. I have some minimal experience with Qt which I used maybe 10 years ago in some project.

And I don't really have much (or any) free time.

I was thinking more about my other tooltip suggestions as I assumed that those changes would probably be much simpler to implement, while they would be equally helpful for my use case.

Currently I'm thinking anyway about yet another solution: Somehow extract the pop-up notes programmatically with some Python script, then use SyncTeX to find the corresponding place in the Latex code, and try to apply the patches directly, and maybe report me those where it can not be applied.

The changes by the proofreading service are actually very consistent in style. Maybe they used some tool for that. They used strikethrough marks with note to indicate some replacement, otherwise just some addition.