[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 22 06:47:01 + 2008 --- -mba: It's not about the file format. It's about a function of the sequence field that we don't support. It makes a lot more sense to add this function to our field than to tweak the import code and get documents that you cannot work with anymore. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|STARTED |RESOLVED Resolution| |LATER --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 22 06:50:20 + 2008 --- ah I lost interest in this ages ago - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User mba changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|'mba' |'hbrinkm,mba,os' Target milestone|OOo 3.0 |OOo 3.x --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 21 12:03:30 + 2008 --- Did we learn anything from the docx import that could help us to understand better what the binary format is about here? As I assume that we won't get that fixed in the next few weeks I move the target to 3.x - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User mh changed the following: What|Old value |New value Target milestone|OOo 2.4 |OOo 3.0 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Feb 4 14:23:22 + 2008 --- set target 3.0 - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Target milestone|--- |OOo 2.4 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 31 15:23:51 + 2007 --- next to impossible for me to do this without a working copy of word under windows, deferring until I can get that back up and working again. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Issue type|PATCH |ENHANCEMENT --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jun 14 07:55:59 + 2007 --- let's unset patch to keep those statistics in sync with reality - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 6 10:23:44 + 2007 --- Caolan, do you agree with Oliver? Do you want to complete the work or should we close the issue? - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User mba changed the following: What|Old value |New value CC|''|'mba' - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|NEW |STARTED --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 6 10:40:25 + 2007 --- When I get a chance and dig out a copy of word to see what the right thing to do is I'll revise the patch. I don't see that closing it helps matters :-) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 6 10:44:11 + 2007 --- Sorry, of course I meant change its type to DEFECT. :-) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 8 12:24:20 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44931) another test case - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 8 12:27:25 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44932) yet another test case - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User od changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|od|cmc --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 8 12:43:13 + 2007 --- OD-CMC: Thanks for the revised patch. While reviewing it I find out that the patch still doesn't meet the Microsoft Word restarting of the sequence value algorithm. My findings are that the \s option is only evaluated, when the following conditions are hold: - no \r option before the \s option. - the field is the first one after a heading (or the first before any heading). - the restart outline level is equal or greater than the outline level of the previous heading. Please verify my findings and revise your patch? Thx. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 4 08:10:27 + 2007 --- OD-CMC: Thx for the revised patch. I will review it at the beginning of the next week - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |44797) new proposed patch --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 2 07:34:03 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44797) new proposed patch - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|cmc |od Status|STARTED |NEW --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 2 07:34:29 + 2007 --- cmc-od: how about this... - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 1 12:51:51 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44782) updated test case with an extra sneaky bit or two - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User od changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment data| |Created an attachment (id= | |44776) test document creat | |ed with Micorsoft Word 200 | |3 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 11:59:40 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44776) test document created with Micorsoft Word 2003 - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User od changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|od|cmc --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 12:52:18 + 2007 --- OD-CMC: I've reviewed your patch. Unfortunately, it doesn't work as excepted. Please revise your patch. I've found the following problems: (1) It doesn't work with the attached document testWW8.doc, because the condition to trigger the restart of the sequence numbers doesn't become true in method SwWW8ImplReader::SetTxtFmtCollAndListLevel(..). I think the condition should be pTxtNode-GetOutlineLevel() NO_NUMBERING and then method ResetLevelTiedSequences(..) should be called with parameter pTxtNode-GetOutlineLevel() (2) The data structure SwWW8ImplReader::maResetSequences is filled up with duplicate entries again and again, when a sequence field is imported and no need for restart is found. (3) Investigation of Microsoft Word 2003 reveals, that the switch \s can only have an effect on the field, which has this switch. In your solution the \s switch of a field has effect on the next field of the same sequence - see attached document. (4) Investigation of Microsoft Word 2003 reveals, that the switch \s has no effect, if switch \r comes before the \s switch, but it can have an effect, if the switch \r comes after the \s switch - see attached document. (5) Investigation of Microsoft Word 2003 reveals, that the switch \s has no effect, if the field isn't the first item after the corresponding heading - see attached document. (6) Your code doesn't consider, that the document can contain fields of the same sequence with switch \s for different outline levels. (7) Investigation of Microsoft Word 2003 reveals, that switch \r has no effect, if switch \s comes before it, regardless of the situation, if the switch \s has an effect or not. Can you please consider this in your revised patch. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Status|NEW |STARTED --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 14:56:19 + 2007 --- I'll poke this around some more and see if I can pick up the rest of the subtleties - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User od changed the following: What|Old value |New value Assigned to|mba |od --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 26 14:32:00 + 2007 --- taking over for patch review. - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 Issue #|76689 Summary|.doc: Implementation of the /s flag for the SEQ fiel |d Component|Word processor Version|OOo 2.2 Platform|All URL| OS/Version|All Status|NEW Status whiteboard| Keywords| Resolution| Issue type|PATCH Priority|P3 Subcomponent|open-import Assigned to|mba Reported by|cmc --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Apr 25 12:30:12 + 2007 --- This flag (currently not imported) means to reset the Sequence when an outline level equal to the following parameter is encountered in the document. Attached is an implementation of this, a sample document to illustrate the problem can be found at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236751 http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word/HP051861901033.aspx is some documentation on this /s flag cmc-mba: to whomever is currently maintaining the .doc filters for consideration - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 User cmc changed the following: What|Old value |New value Attachment is patch| |Created an attachment (id= | |44673) patch to do this --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Apr 25 12:30:50 + 2007 --- Created an attachment (id=44673) patch to do this - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[sw-issues] [Issue 76689] .doc: Implementation of th e /s flag for the SEQ field
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76689 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Apr 25 12:36:46 + 2007 --- (FWIW issue 19981 is related to this in that the problem there is often combined with this one) - Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
