100% stacked area chart - Detail label formatting options 'missing'

[D_M]

Hello,

Having upgraded to the latest release (version: 2.128.751.0 at the time of writing) it's been observed that, by default, the 'Detail' formatting options for the Data labels pane is currently missing 'Bold', 'Italic' and 'Underline' as options in PBI desktop, as shown below:

Also, just to confirm from my testing, this is the case even if using a default Microsoft theme (as well as a standard custom theme). However, if a 'detailBold' option is invoked in a custom PBI theme file explicitly, this then works in the relevant PBI file in PBI desktop, and also displays in the visual, like so:

Clearly, this is not expected behaviour, so would suggest these formatting options to be made available in the formatting pane as per other similar text outputs, thanks!

[Anonymous]

HI  @D_M 

I checked the previous version, about the stacked area chart visual, in the previous version data lable=>detail there is no 'Bold', 'Italic' and 'Underline' inside . 

Can you find which version has this feature? If it can be proven that this previous visual had this feature, then I can submit the issue and have them fix it.

If the stacked area chart doesn't have this feature to begin with, you can vote the idea and comment there to improve this feature. It is a place for customers provide feedback about Microsoft Office products . What’s more, if a feedback is high voted there by other customers, it will be promising that Microsoft Product Team will take it into consideration when designing the next version in the future. 

Thank you for your cooperation!

Best Regards,
Community Support Team _ Ailsa Tao

[D_M]

Hi  Alisa,

Specifically this is regarding the new, 100% stacked area chart, but also, the behaviour above proves that the formatting option is already recognized in PBI desktop (it wouldn't respond to the custom theme file that way otherwise), but is not being displayed in the GUI. Therefore I would not class this as a feature request, but again more of a fix so that the GUI is consistent with the formatting options that should be available by default (and again, already ARE available if invoked by the custom JSON theme file).

To further clarify, once invoked via a custom JSON theme file, I am then presented with a working 'Bold' button in the GUI, which allows me to activate and deactivate bold formatting for the detail text, as though it were already a standard formatting option in the GUI (which it should be). Is it your summation this is expected behaviour?

You do make a good point about the standard area chart though, as it would appear this is also missing the full range of formatting properties that should be available for the detail text, so thank you for raising that. I had missed this since by default, the standard area chart uses the value card/text (as opposed to the 'detail' text, which is the default for new 100% version data labels), so I wasn't aware of the issue with the detail card in the standard stacked area chart. But in that case also, I would argue the formatting options should be consistent across the board for all label text in general. This would be in line with standard best practice for GUI design, and would enhance the overall user experience in Power BI.

Also, one final note: on the macro level you could class this as simply a request that the text formatting options are consistent with other visuals, for example the stacked bar chart already has the expected formatting options in place for both forms of text, as shown below:

However circling back to the original issue, the missing formatting for the 100% stacked area chart is already recognized by PBI desktop, which further proves it should already be there in the GUI by default, but is initially hidden in the GUI. If it were a truly 'new feature', as you suggest, PBI desktop would not respond to the call to invoke the formatting when called by the JSON theme file to do so, and it certainly would not add a clickalbe 'Bold' button in the GUI once invoked as such.

I hope the above has now clarified the issue/bug I've identified, thanks!