https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128356
--- Comment #18 from John <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Arrigo Marchiori from comment #17) > <style:style> elements _are not supposed to have any_ office:name attribute. > Whilst not outputting the office:name attribute in the first style definition will probably fix Issue 128356 does this numbering peculiarity from Issue 127745 suggest something else is happening which needs to be fixed? Note it always seems only to be FIRST style definition which is corrupted, be it a paragraph or table style definition, or content.xml or styles.xml. (See comment #13) > See Issue 127745 - Read Error: Format error discovered ... at n,nnnn > (row,col) > > https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=127745 > > The P1 Style definition is similarly corrupted and > > office:name="__Annotation__153_24419901911111111" > office:name="__Annotation__158_2441990191111" > office:name="__Annotation__248_244199019111111" > office:name="__Annotation__401_244199019111" > office:name="__Annotation__414_24419901911" > > has been inserted into the P1 Style definition. Note the strange numbers where a " 1 " seems to be appended again and again to the Annotation number. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the issue.
