On Monday 12 March 2012 11:30:19 am Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 23:09, Greg Madden <gomadtr...@gci.net> wrote: > > There are differences between AOO & LO, significant enough to warrant > > having a choice in Debian of which one to use. > > What are the significant differences that you have perceived? I might > have to maintain a page outlining the differences if they really do > affect workflow, features, and document compatibility.
Look at the referenced bug reports, there are attachments to the reports showing what has happened to my templates & archived docs. others have noticed this also. To LO devs credit they patched v3.5.x? so that the double lines are no longer so large that they hide data in the cells for archived docs. Newest bug is for the double line style not being a close representation of previous bouble line style, e.g. new docs with tables using that style will not match archived docs with tables with that style. As far as maintaining a page with the differences I think it is worth watching how the new feature in LO concerning table,border line styles plays out. Not only did it break backwards compatibility in LO, it departs how AOO renders those line styles also. AOO does not render the double line style created in LO 3.4.x & later(they are blank), have not tested other table line styles -- Peace, Greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203121809.12502.gomadtr...@gci.net
