Search Issue Tracker
By Design
By Design in 6000.5.X
Votes
0
Found in
6000.0.65f1
6000.3.3f1
6000.4.0b3
6000.5.0a3
Issue ID
UUM-131729
Regression
No
Transition Animations “Property” and “Easing” menus have inconsistent UI design
Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a new Unity project
2. Open UI Builder window
3. In Hierarchy add Button Element
4. Find and expand “Transition Animations” section in Inspector window
5. Open “Property” menu and observe it
6. Open “Easing” menu and observe it
Actual results: Inconsistent design between “Property” and “Easing” menus in Transition Animations sections in UI Builder window
Expected results: Menu designs should be consistent in Transition Animations section in UI Builder window
Reproducible with versions: 6000.0.65f1, 6000.3.3f1, 6000.4.0b3, 6000.5.0a3
Tested on (OS): Ubuntu 24.04, macOS Silicon Tahoe 26.2
Add comment
All about bugs
View bugs we have successfully reproduced, and vote for the bugs you want to see fixed most urgently.
Latest issues
- Build fails when building a project containing an 18+ dimension array with IL2CPP
- [Android][Sentis] Human poses are not detected when using the BlazePose model
- Sprite Editor Outline Tool Overlay is not displayed when no Sprite is selected
- “No method with RuntimeInitializeOnLoadMethod attribute” warning from ReadmeEditor.cs is thrown after installing Project Auditor Rules
- Projection matrix is altered when using RasterCommandBuffer.ClearRenderTarget on DX12 and Metal
Resolution Note:
Thank you for reporting a bug to Unity.
After reviewing the behavior, we've confirmed it aligns with the current design and intended use of the feature. We understand this may differ from your expectations or workflow.
We will close this case as 'As Designed.' If you have feedback on how the feature could better meet your needs, please let us know - we value your input and consider it in future improvements.
Resolution Note (6000.5.X):
Thank you for reporting a bug to Unity.
After reviewing the behavior, we've confirmed it aligns with the current design and intended use of the feature. We understand this may differ from your expectations or workflow.
We will close this case as 'As Designed.' If you have feedback on how the feature could better meet your needs, please let us know - we value your input and consider it in future improvements.