sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx |binary
sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx | 8 ++++++++
sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx | 10 +++++++---
sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx | 3 ++-
4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
New commits:
commit 00ac19068de5e120d1620a719aa64f1203c639ae
Author: Miklos Vajna <vmik...@collabora.com>
AuthorDate: Mon Mar 18 21:40:15 2019 +0100
Commit: Miklos Vajna <vmik...@collabora.com>
CommitDate: Tue Mar 19 09:07:15 2019 +0100
tdf#120548 sw ApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering: fix handling of font
color
Regression from commit b2c1474c1dc93b69f0ede03fc5c9ab496c669955
(SwTxtNode::IsIgnoredCharFmtForNumbering: ignore RES_CHRATR_COLOR,
2014-11-20), where the problem was that unconditionally ignoring or not
ignoring the font color is not correct.
Re-examining the test document from the above commit, it has an explicit
font color set in the numbering, while this bugdoc doesn't have it.
So make applying the paragraph mark font color to the numbering
conditional if the numbering already has a color set, this makes both
cases work correctly.
Change-Id: I43a6dec7d3a77689e2acbdc9d3671e79a9c4cac8
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/69400
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmik...@collabora.com>
diff --git a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx
b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..60943645e939
Binary files /dev/null and b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx differ
diff --git a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx
b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx
index 7a03744d46f2..3ea6916e2839 100644
--- a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx
+++ b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx
@@ -103,6 +103,14 @@ DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(testGroupShapeFontName,
"groupshape-fontname.docx")
getProperty<OUString>(getRun(getParagraphOfText(1, xText), 1),
"CharFontNameAsian"));
}
+DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(testTdf120548, "tdf120548.docx")
+{
+ // Without the accompanying fix in place, this test would have failed with
'Expected: 00ff0000;
+ // Actual: ffffffff', i.e. the numbering portion was black, not red.
+ CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL(OUString("00ff0000"),
+
parseDump("//Special[@nType='PortionType::Number']/SwFont", "color"));
+}
+
DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(test120551, "tdf120551.docx")
{
auto nHoriOrientPosition = getProperty<sal_Int32>(getShape(1),
"HoriOrientPosition");
diff --git a/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx b/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx
index d0cad7b2569c..9138a35eacdc 100644
--- a/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx
+++ b/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx
@@ -412,7 +412,9 @@ SwLinePortion *SwTextFormatter::NewExtraPortion(
SwTextFormatInfo &rInf )
* character than can be configured to be shown). However, in practice MSO
also uses it as direct formatting
* for numbering in that paragraph. I don't know if the problem is in the spec
or in MSWord.
*/
-static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( SwFont* pNumFnt,
SwTextFormatInfo& rInf, const IDocumentSettingAccess* pIDSA )
+static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(SwFont* pNumFnt,
SwTextFormatInfo& rInf,
+ const
IDocumentSettingAccess* pIDSA,
+ const SwAttrSet* pFormat)
{
if(
!pIDSA->get(DocumentSettingId::APPLY_PARAGRAPH_MARK_FORMAT_TO_NUMBERING ))
return;
@@ -447,6 +449,8 @@ static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(
SwFont* pNumFnt, SwTextFor
{
if
(SwTextNode::IsIgnoredCharFormatForNumbering(pItem->Which()))
pCleanedSet->ClearItem(pItem->Which());
+ else if (pFormat && pFormat->HasItem(pItem->Which()))
+ pCleanedSet->ClearItem(pItem->Which());
if (aIter.IsAtEnd())
break;
@@ -552,7 +556,7 @@ SwNumberPortion *SwTextFormatter::NewNumberPortion(
SwTextFormatInfo &rInf ) con
if( pFormat )
pNumFnt->SetDiffFnt( pFormat, pIDSA );
- checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( pNumFnt.get(), rInf,
pIDSA );
+ checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(pNumFnt.get(), rInf,
pIDSA, pFormat);
if ( pFormatFnt )
{
@@ -608,7 +612,7 @@ SwNumberPortion *SwTextFormatter::NewNumberPortion(
SwTextFormatInfo &rInf ) con
if( pFormat )
pNumFnt->SetDiffFnt( pFormat, pIDSA );
- checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( pNumFnt.get(),
rInf, pIDSA );
+ checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(pNumFnt.get(),
rInf, pIDSA, pFormat);
// we do not allow a vertical font
pNumFnt->SetVertical( pNumFnt->GetOrientation(),
m_pFrame->IsVertical() );
diff --git a/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx
b/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx
index a30ee18233b3..b7b80cbfb23c 100644
--- a/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx
+++ b/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx
@@ -1760,7 +1760,8 @@ void SwTextNode::DelSoftHyph( const sal_Int32 nStt, const
sal_Int32 nEnd )
bool SwTextNode::IsIgnoredCharFormatForNumbering(const sal_uInt16 nWhich)
{
- return (nWhich == RES_CHRATR_UNDERLINE || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_COLOR ||
nWhich == RES_CHRATR_BACKGROUND || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_ESCAPEMENT);
+ return (nWhich == RES_CHRATR_UNDERLINE || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_BACKGROUND
+ || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_ESCAPEMENT);
}
//In MS Word, following properties of the paragraph end position won't affect
the formatting of bullets, so we ignore them:
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-commits mailing list
libreoffice-comm...@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-commits
