Re: Apache and ODF

[Fan Zheng]

To Ian:

Yes, I agree with you that there shall be options for:
1. Fitful formatting way, for the READING; and
2. Uniform formatting way, for the REPRESENTATION;

Thus, the solution will lead:
A: The bad thing is that there shall be a series of formatting
specification definitions, for Kindle, Kindle Fire, Kindle Fire II, iPad,
iPad Mini, IPod touch, IPhone BLA BLA BLA
B: The good thing is, such refining job indicating various device
platforms, could be finished inside the AOO existing framework and
formatting process, only with the external works on supplying above
definitions.



To Rory:
In my point, now, we may need not to specify the exact target we are aimed
at. For although the detailed specification of every type of popular
devices we faced are different, the problems need to be clarified and
solved are commonly the same type of issue, is that "Adaptability and
Fidelity, which is bigger". Definitely, it is an UX issue, which should let
KG to be involved in; But, a given solution for the issue should be
workable for all the devices (of cause maybe including annoy duplicated
works, but should sharing the same working path and steps), whatever the
decision will be.

Ah, yes, maybe we let the new comers confused in some degree. So should we
keep on going within a new thread? Or renaming the current one?

Thanks.

ZhengFan.



2012/10/26 Rory O'Farrell 

> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:58:25 +0100
> Ian Lynch  wrote:
>
> > On 26 October 2012 08:42, Fan Zheng  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, All:
> > >
> > > I am confused about the UX specifications of document representation
> > > requirement on mobile devices, that which is the most first important
> point
> > > should be, the different device condition adaptability of layout
> result? or
> > > the fidelity of the document originally recorded?
> > >
> > > For example. An ODT format text document with several pages sized as
> > > "Letter", which is physically defined as 279:216 (ratio as 1.29), and
> user
> > > want to render it in a Kindle Fire, which supplies a 1024:600 (ratio as
> > > 1.71) screen for presenting.
> >
> >
> > Is it possible to have choices? Keep the original page aspect ratio an
> > scroll (Never used a kindle so not sure if it can scroll but obviously
> > Android on phones can!) or have a "fit to aspect" where the page is
> scaled
> > to the kindle in AOO befor export. If one of the pre-defined page
> templates
> > in AOO was the kindle page size it would be possible to reformat the
> pages
> > in a document to that size just as you can change from say A4 to US
> letter.
> > Probably for complex documents with graphics this would break some parts
> of
> > the layout but for the sort of text only novels etc mostly used on these
> > devices it should work well enough. This assumes you can export to
> > epub/mobi format in any scale but I'm assuming that will be similar to
> > export to pdf. Of course the resulting document layout could be checked
> by
> > viewing the epub/mobi output. Having an odf viewer for the mobile devices
> > would be an alternative method and probably less constrained than using
> > epub formats but it is also more work to do it. OTOH a versatile odf
> reader
> > for mobile devices could be very useful in helping establish odf as the
> > open standard for all types of document.
> >
> >
> > > If we do much more care about the adaptability
> > > of representation, lots data recorded inside the file will be changed,
> > > removed or even ignored. But, if we care about the fidelity much more,
> we
> > > have to record all the document data inside, and rendering it on the
> > > devices dutifully. In the case, all we could do for the UX, is to give
> some
> > > adjustable scale.  Such differences are meaning not only the pagination
> > > stuff, but also some solid data inside: thinking about a full
> > > page-width-size table for instance.
> > >
> >
> > There can be issues with documents that have both portrait and landscape
> > pages in them on normal computer screens.
> >
> > >
> > > Of cause, all the former document editor/viewer applications for
> desktop,
> > > will obey the "Keep Fidelity" as the very first rule. But what about
> the
> > > mobile device platforms?
> > >
> > > As such differences will actually lead the solution into the different
> > > direction, we maybe should make it clear before having a deeper
> discussion.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > ZhengFan
&g

Re: Apache and ODF

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, All:

I am confused about the UX specifications of document representation
requirement on mobile devices, that which is the most first important point
should be, the different device condition adaptability of layout result? or
the fidelity of the document originally recorded?

For example. An ODT format text document with several pages sized as
"Letter", which is physically defined as 279:216 (ratio as 1.29), and user
want to render it in a Kindle Fire, which supplies a 1024:600 (ratio as
1.71) screen for presenting. If we do much more care about the adaptability
of representation, lots data recorded inside the file will be changed,
removed or even ignored. But, if we care about the fidelity much more, we
have to record all the document data inside, and rendering it on the
devices dutifully. In the case, all we could do for the UX, is to give some
adjustable scale.  Such differences are meaning not only the pagination
stuff, but also some solid data inside: thinking about a full
page-width-size table for instance.

Of cause, all the former document editor/viewer applications for desktop,
will obey the "Keep Fidelity" as the very first rule. But what about the
mobile device platforms?

As such differences will actually lead the solution into the different
direction, we maybe should make it clear before having a deeper discussion.

Thanks.

ZhengFan


2012/10/26 Andreas Säger 

> Am 25.10.2012 21:14, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> > If you search for it, you will find various solutions for converting
> > ODF to EPub.  But I have not seen something that does the same for
> > Kindle's MOBI format.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
>
> Thank you. I know about the converters. The problem is that all our
> office documents are ODF documents. The Kindle device does not provide
> any access to our documents until they have been converted by some other
> device.
>
>
>

Re: Apache Asia Roadshow 2012 - Dec 13th Beijing

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Donald:

Sorry that Shen Feng was sick for several days, and I guess that maybe he
will be back on next Monday.

Thanks.

ZhengFan

2012/10/25 Donald Harbison 

> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Justin Erenkrantz  >wrote:
>
> > I'm moving this thread over to con...@apache.org which is the right
> > address to continue this conversation.
> >
> > +1 for the event - you all have run this type of event several times
> > before, so I trust that you know what you are doing and will put on a
> > terrific event for the local audience!
> >
> > Please let me know if there's anything we can do on our end to assist.
> >
> > Good luck!  -- justin
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Jimmy,Jing Lv 
> wrote:
> > > Hello community, board,
> > >
> > >We are planning the Apache Asia Roadshow 2012. This year we've
> got
> > > sponsor from cloud valley world (
> > http://www.cloudvalleyworld.com/index.php)
> > > and China Opensource Promotion Union(http://www.copu.org.cn/), and it
> > will
> > > be held in Beijing. Here is the plan:
> > > 1. The target date is one day after the cloud valley world event, Dec
> > 13th
> > > (BTW, the cloud valley world has invited some key person in China IT
> > > Industry, including VP MSFT China, VP Intel China, CTO Alibaba etc,
> it's
> > a
> > > great if Apache/open source can speak aloud). We got sponsor from the
> > > CloudValleyWorld for the conference room (in Beijing, ZhongGuanCun)
> > > 2. It'll be one-day event, including 3 key speaker and 4+ sessions. And
> > plan
> > > to have 100+ audiences.
> > > we plan the main topic around cloud computing: open source really
> > produce a
> > > basement  to the cloud computing, like Apache Hadoop and cloudstack;
> > welcome
> > > any open source topic in or out of this area.
> >
>
> The Apache OpenOffice community has a significant local representation in
> Beijing. I'm cc'ing the community
> to alert our Chinese contributors to reach out to you and explore the
> possibility of adding an Apache OpenOffice
> session to increase its visibility. We just graduated to an Apache TLP, so
> we have a solid foundation upon which
> to build with a strong global community. The Chinese community is very
> important and making a large contribution.
>
> Sheng Feng Liu, what do you think?
>
>
> > > 3. As last event, we may setup the homepage, and T-Shirt/Flyer etc will
> > be
> > > prepared
> > >
> > >   We'd like to request the approval for this event, and will post
> in
> > the
> > > Apache Conference list with the detail plan, agenda and budget.
> > >   We'd like invite someone from board or our member to attend this
> > > event. Please tell us if interested.
> > >
> > >   Any suggestions/comments? Thanks!
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Best Regards!
> > >
> > > Jimmy, Jing Lv
> > > Apache Member
> >
>

Re: Table of Contents Usability?

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, All:

Actually, I do have the plan on giving the solution of the whole TOC stuff,
including:
 1. The jumping tag , given by default;
 2. The using the "internal link" as the TOC link style by default;

But, maybe you have already know that,such TOC stuff, especially the very
famous TOC dialog, still including a series of usability issues inside. For
example, the tab stop position justification issue and the sample template
issue. OW, KG and I have had some discussion on it already, about the
proper design of whole TOC usability enhancement.

Maybe later I will create a WIKI page for recording our suggestions on it,
for further and deeper discussion about this topic.

Thanks a lot!

ZhengFan

2012/10/24 Rony G. Flatscher (Apache) 

>
> On 24.10.2012 12:14, Rory O'Farrell wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:53:47 +0100
> > Rory O'Farrell  wrote:
> >
> >> A recent thread on the en-Forum threw up problems with the interface of
> the Table of Contents generation.  Perhaps Kevin Grignon might care to note
> this as an area worthy of improvement.
> >>
> >> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=56908
> > A further note on this in
> >
> http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=56976&p=250998
>
> Maybe also user generated indices which cannot be hyperlinked. This is
> strange as well, as it seems
> to be "natural" that any generated table links to the references giving
> the page number, but not
> allowing one to hyperlink the entries. Hence exporting such documents to
> PDF will have hyperlinks on
> the TOC, but not on the user generated tables.
> (Rather, one needs to use a cumbersome trick that has to do with unused
> heading levels; something a
> regular writer user won't know about.)
>
> ---rony
>

Re: Open Office on IOS ?

[Fan Zheng]

Well, still personally, without high speed network I would prefer reading
physical books, for I can hardly start my work, whatever the cloudy stuffs
are being used or not.

Being connected all the time, is the way that part of people are living in.
Cloudy stuff serves the people who connected, as the computer stuff serves
the people who plugged.

Oh, Yes, we are talking about the mobility of Openoffice…But I guess there
will be a big intersection between the group of guys who want to use
Openoffice on the mobile devices and the group of guys who are always
connected.


For the people who want to use the Openoffice on the mobile devices but not
be connected?…Yes we need an APP at the time. But as the people can get the
APP from the APP store, I guess they just met the broken network
occasionally.

So, what about enjoying a book in the moment? :D
 在 2012/10/19 12:20 AM，"Larry Gusaas" 写道：

> On 2012-10-18 8:10 AM Fan Zhengzhou wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think the cloudy Openoffice would be a better choice. For
>> based on it, we need not to care about the different specifications among
>> the popular devices.
>>
>
> That would be a bad choice. Users could only use OpenOffice when they had
> access to the internet. Also many people only have slow dial-up access.
>
> --
> __**___
>
> Larry I. Gusaas
> Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
> Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
> "An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind
> theirs." - Edgard Varese
>
>
>

Re: Open Office on IOS ?

[Fan Zheng]

hi Fox:

Similarly, some other guy asked several days before, that whether there is
an Android version openoffice.
Also similarly, the answer is NO, too. For "Openoffice on IOS or Android"
means not only the completely different implementation of all functions,
but also the brandly new UX design.
Of cause we Openoffice guys know the value of mobile applications, but we
just do not have the golden fingers:)
Personally, I think the cloudy Openoffice would be a better choice. For
based on it, we need not to care about the different specifications among
the popular devices.

Zhengfan
在 2012/10/18 1:15 AM，"Virgo Fox" 写道：

> *Is there a version of Open Office for iPhone or an APP ?  *
>
> *Love That Virgo Fox
> Sent from iCloud*
>
>

Re: I am new for Apache Open Office

[Fan Zheng]

Hi:

Welcome to the Apache OpenOffice Commnunity! Here is the gate for enjoying
the open source world!

2012/9/30 zhun guo 

> Dear all,
> I am new for this mail list. I am from Shanghai , I major in online
> office interoperability and ODF. Nice to meet you !
>Best Regards!
>
> Zhun Guo
> Shanghai Biaoma IT Co.
> www.mabaoo.com
> mike5guo(at)gmail.com 
>

Re: [Call for Test] [Enhancement]Graphic Bullets Interoperability Improvement with MS Word Binary Format

[Fan Zheng]

I will take cover this request.

2012/9/29 chengjh 

> The volunteer needs to prepare the test cases for the
> improvement first based on the info published in the wiki,and then run test
> after the patch committed.Currently, the development is still on going. And
> the patch will be submitted for reviewing soon.thanks.
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Regina Henschel  >wrote:
>
> > Hi Jian Hong Cheng,
> >
> > chengjh schrieb:
> >
> >  Hi,
> >>
> >> I will improve the graphic bullets fidelity with MS Word binary format
> >> through the enhancement issue
> >> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=120928.Please<
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120928.Please>refer to the
> >> details from the wiki http://s.apache.org/W8v. Any volunteer can help
> me
> >> the test work?Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >>
> > ? I do not see anything to "test".
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Regina
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>

[call for review] Re: svn commit: r1386590 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk: ./ main/sw/inc/ main/sw/source/core/doc/ main/sw/source/core/tox/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/dump/ main/

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Pavel:

I have aleady open a issue 121066 in BugZilla, and also supplied a patch
for it.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121066

Do you have any time on reviewing the codes? Or any other volunteers?

Thanks a lot!

2012/9/18 Pavel Janík 

> Hi,
>
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:46 PM, o...@apache.org wrote:
>
> > +void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong nFrom,sal_uLong nTo)
> > +{
> > +std::pair aRange = aSttCps.equal_range(nFrom);
> > +CPItr aItr = aRange.first;
> > +while (aItr != aRange.second)
> > +{
> > +if (aItr->second)
> > +{
> > +if (aItr->second->first == nFrom)
>
> the last line is a source of compiler warning:
>
> sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void
> WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’:
> sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed
> and unsigned integer expressions
>
> Can you please fix it?
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
>

[Call for review] Issue about the tab stop filling character missing

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:

Here is a issue 121076 in BugZilla, some tab stop filling character missing
stuff, in Writer.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121076

Now I supplied a patch for it, anyone volunteer on reviewing the codes?

Thanks a lot!

Re: svn commit: r1386590 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk: ./ main/sw/inc/ main/sw/source/core/doc/ main/sw/source/core/tox/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/dump/ main/sw/source/ui/index

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Pavel:

I will try to fix it.

Thanks a lot!


2012/9/18 Pavel Janík 

> Hi,
>
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:46 PM, o...@apache.org wrote:
>
> > +void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong nFrom,sal_uLong nTo)
> > +{
> > +std::pair aRange = aSttCps.equal_range(nFrom);
> > +CPItr aItr = aRange.first;
> > +while (aItr != aRange.second)
> > +{
> > +if (aItr->second)
> > +{
> > +if (aItr->second->first == nFrom)
>
> the last line is a source of compiler warning:
>
> sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void
> WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’:
> sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed
> and unsigned integer expressions
>
> Can you please fix it?
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
>

[Call For Review] Review the solution of i120759

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:

As the fix work of issue 120759 "[From Symphony]Bookmark value changed when
opening the doc file " in BugZilla is already done, now I am expecting any
volunteer for taking the code review work of it. Thanks so much!

Here is the link:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120759


your ZhengFan

Re: [PERSONAL] My absence

[Fan Zheng]

Also take care of yourself please.

2012/9/7 Shenfeng Liu 

> Don,
>   Best wishes to you and your family!
>
> - Simon
>
>
> 2012/9/7 Donald Harbison 
>
> > I feel it necessary to explain why I have been absent from discussions
> here
> > and on ooo-private recently.
> >
> > My wife was stricken with a serious medical emergency Wednesday, August
> > 29th. She is recovering after surgery, and is in an intensive care unit
> > here in one of the top hospitals in Boston. Needless to say, my attention
> > is not on Apache OpenOffice as much as I love this project and community.
> > The past week has been personally very stressful and exhausting. Next
> week
> > looks a whole lot better as her condition has improved dramatically and
> she
> > is now on the path to recovery.
> >
> > Graduation is a very important goal, I will be doing what I can to help
> > with this. I've also been actively leading the OpenOffice track
> development
> > for ApacheCon EU. Oliver-Rainer Wittmann has stepped in to take over this
> > effort over the past week. Thank you Oliver.
> >
> > Thanks for your understanding. The medical team is optimistic that my
> wife
> > will have a full recovery, but it will be a lengthy process.  In the
> > meantime, I do plan to crank up my work engine as her care and situation
> > have now become much more stabilized.
> >
>

Re: [Call For Feature Test] The TOC fidelity enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, XiaoTing:

Thanks so much for your kindly support.



2012/9/6 Xiao Ting Xiao 

> I'd like to test the feature.
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Fan Zheng 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Community:
> >
> > I have finished the TOC enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format
> > importing/exporting, which design proposal was discussed in WIKI page:
> > http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC
> > And the all modification for the feature was delivered into the SVN
> > revision 1380613 of branches/writer001 already, which is ready for test.
> > Here is the issue link in BugZilla:
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
> >
> > So, is there any volunteer for the QA work on this feature?  Thanks so
> > much!
> >
> > Yours, Easyfan
> >
>

[Call For Feature Test] The TOC fidelity enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:

I have finished the TOC enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format
importing/exporting, which design proposal was discussed in WIKI page:
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC
And the all modification for the feature was delivered into the SVN
revision 1380613 of branches/writer001 already, which is ready for test.
Here is the issue link in BugZilla:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963

So, is there any volunteer for the QA work on this feature?  Thanks so much!

Yours, Easyfan

[Call For Review] Issue 120718: [From Symphony]After save the sample file with page border and shadow to doc, the shadow depth and color changed

[Fan Zheng]

Hi Community:

I have fixed a issue 120718 in BugZilla, which need your kindly support on
solution review, here is the link:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071
8

Thanks a lot!

[Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's border size and spacing is not correct when opne the .doc file

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:
I have fixed the issue 120716 in the BugZilla, which need your kindly
support on solution review, here is the link:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071
6

Thanks a lot!

Re: [Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's spacing is not correct when open the .doc file

[Fan Zheng]

Sorry, the link is incorrect for this issue, update it.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717>
6

2012/8/30 Fan Zheng 

> Hi, Community:
>
> I have fixed a defect issue 120716 in BugZilla, which need your kindly
> support on solution review, here is the link:
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717>
> 6
>
> Thanks a lot!
>

[Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's spacing is not correct when open the .doc file

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:

I have fixed a defect issue 120716 in BugZilla, which need your kindly
support on solution review, here is the link:
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717

Thanks a lot!

[Discussion/Review Request] The MSO Word interoperability issues solution on page border

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Community:

Inside AOO Writer, there are some MSO Word interoperability issues on the
 page border stuff.

After the first step investigation, something show that it is not a simple
or defect level work, so I wrote a document about the issue and possible
solution on it, and post into Wiki. Here is the link:

http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/MSInteroperability/PageBorder

For you discuss and review, thanks for your kindly comments and supporting.

Re: Save as mobi or prc and epub

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Cherise:

So sorry that I missed this thread before, which I am actually interested
in.

About the e-book exporting stuff, would you please tell me more about the
details you want? Or whether could you please answer my following questions?

1. When exporting to an e-book, should we consider the fidelity as we
always do for the other kind exchange file exporting?
2. should such exported e-book files could be auto-fit-able for different
reading devices?
3. What should be the good design, for certain contents, page
header/footer/footnote/reference for example?
4. Whether the PDF file can not satisfy your e-book requirements, and why?
5. The large scale and in-split-able objects, a big figure for example,
should be zoomed for presenting?
6. As the wireless printing, Air Print and Cloud Print for example, is
coming popular, do you also have such requirement on e-book?
7. The contents inside a e-book should be designed to be able to be
selected and COPY/PASTE?
8. What should be a good design for splitting tables in e-book?

Maybe questions above are somehow ridiculous to an experienced e-book user.
Sorry for that. I have to confess that, I want to help AOO to own such kind
capability on exporting e-books, but I have very little user experiences as
a e-book reader. So thank you so much for your tips on that!

Have a good day.

2012/7/11 Rob Weir 

> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Cherise Kelley
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is there any chance that Open Office will add the option to save as
> > Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing ready mobi or prc
> > and Barnes and Noble ready epub
> > and iBookstore ready files, etc?
> >
>
> Hello Cherise,
>
> There are some extensions that give some ebook support, which you can
> find by searching our extensions site here:
>
> http://extensions.services.openoffice.org
>
> However, I am not aware of any current initiative to add such support
> to the core program.
>
> Apache OpenOffice is an open source software, programmed, translated,
> tested and supported by volunteers.   So there is certainly the
> possibility to add such support, but only if volunteers step up to
> write the code, or an author of existing code agrees to contribute it
> to the project.  If you know anyone who might be interested in this,
> please send them here, to this mailing list.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
>
> > Users currently go through convoluted methods to do this, involving
> three or more applications.
> >
> > http://www.kindleboards.com/index.php/topic,120045.0.html
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Cherise Kelley
> > http://size12bystpatricksday.blogspot.com/
> >
>

Re: 3.4.1_release_blocker requested: [Bug 120045] Format case change crashes OOo

[Fan Zheng]

So the issue is still there?

I will take a look on it, but not sure about the schedule, for the TOC
loading enhancement is on going...

I will update the status if I have some progress.

2012/7/2 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 21.06.2012 08:23, De Bin Lei wrote:
>
>> 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt 
>>
>>  On 6/21/12 8:02 AM, De Bin Lei wrote:
>>>
 Got it. so it is a crash and regression one.
 +1 for 3.4.1 release blocker from my view, thx.

>>>
>>> +1, I will set the release blocker flag for 3.4.1.
>>>
>>> Debin, Will you merge it in the AOO340 branch?
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, I will. However, there is no fix for it. Anyway I will take care of
>> the code check in for 3.4.1 branch.
>>
>>
> just a question: Is somebody working on a fix for this issue?
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>

Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor

[Fan Zheng]

2012/7/2 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 26.06.2012 03:57, Fan Zheng wrote:
>
>> Seeing my reply in following blue lines please:
>>
>> 2012/6/25 ZuoJun Chen 
>>
>>  Hi,
>>> The idea sounds good to me. The task needs to accomplish piece by
>>> piece
>>> from my point of view.
>>>
>>> I'm look into text repaint process in word processor and trying to fix
>>> the
>>> character painting
>>>
>>> error in issue.119476 when inserting and deleting the text in first line
>>> of
>>> paragraph.
>>>
>>> Seems adding "additional spacing before paragraph" case to enlarge the
>>> repaint rectangle of paragraph line in
>>>
>>>  may be able to partially fix the problem.
>>>
>>> and the problem disturbs me is also how to store additional information
>>> :(
>>>
>>> 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
>>>
>>>  Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 22.06.2012 18:18, Fan Zheng wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi, Oliver:
>>>>>
>>>>> In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should
>>>>> not
>>>>> change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem.
>>>>>
>>>>> So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now
>>>>>
>>>> we
>>>
>>>> know, Under the following situations:
>>>>> a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0;
>>>>> b. The type of line-spacing is "Exactly";
>>>>> c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height;
>>>>> MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional
>>>>> line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff
>>>>>
>>>> commonly
>>>
>>>> because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background
>>>>>
>>>> height
>>>
>>>> and flying object positing stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on
>>>>> representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings
>>>>>
>>>> we
>>>
>>>> talked about, and we want to fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>> So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion,
>>>>>
>>>> we
>>>
>>>> should consider  following candidates:
>>>>> a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above
>>>>> condition, as ZJ already done perfectly;
>>>>> b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard
>>>>> point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting
>>>>> (including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped
>>>>>
>>>> already
>>>
>>>> to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking
>>>>>
>>>> method
>>>
>>>> on working with "big" line spacing.  Such method may need to change the
>>>>> VisArea of a SwTxtFrm;
>>>>> c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I
>>>>> really
>>>>> do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there.
>>>>> d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this;
>>>>>
>>>>> So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very
>>>>>
>>>> beginning
>>>
>>>> of big works.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  I agree to ZhengFan's analysis.
>>>>
>>>> Now, we need to discuss how we address these issues.
>>>>
>>>> My view one this is the following (propsal for discussion):
>>>> - Let us separate the stuff regarding the character painting and the
>>>> object positioning stuff in two issue. 119476 for the character
>>>> painting,
>>>> new issue for the object positioning stuff.
>>>> - Character painting stuff:
>>>> -- I am in favor of a solution which does not change our intrinsic text
>>>> formatting and line portion creation algorithm. Thus, to solve the
>>>>
>>> repaint
>>>
>>>> and selection problem we can store additional information - the
>>>>
>>> additional
>>>
>>>> space taken by the character painting - at the  instance in
>>>>
>>> order
>>>
>>>> to access it during painting and selection actions. The additional space
>>>> taken for the character painting is already part of the "frame area"
>>>> (member ), but not part of the "frame printing area"
>>>> (member ).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> 1 Concern:
>>
>> Could such additional information to be available in ODF Standard?
>> If not, whether it means that, the conversion from MS-Word Doc to ODT lead
>> different representation result?
>>
>>
>>
> I do not think that this is an ODF issue.
> The ODF specification does not say anything about the need to clip the
> text, if it does not fit into the given/calculated line height.
>

Hi, Oliver:

So what will happen, if we give the support on such clipping stuff in MS
Word for the issue we discussed, and then save the document into an ODT
file?


>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>

Re: [BUG 3.4] Printer quality settings wrong in AOO 3.4

[Fan Zheng]

Sorry, we may need more detail information about your issue.

Which platform are you using? Windows, Linux or MacOS ?

2012/7/1 Marco A.G.Pinto 

>  Hi!
>
> I noticed that every time I want to print to my wireless HP Officeject,
> the printing settings are at best quality and photo paper.
>
> It is very hard to change the settings since they always default to that.
>
> It is just a bug report.
>
> Kind regards,
>>Marco A.G.Pinto
>  ---
> --
>

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Good news and thanks Terry.

So the bug would be closed automatically or, need I do anything further?

2012/6/29 YangTerry 

>
>
>
>
> Test again on trunk r1355082 which include modules nss and moz.
> From the result I think we can close this bug.
>
> Test with 3 scenario.
> A. Saved with password, then remove password with same revision
> B. Saved with password with OOo3.3, then remove password with r1355082
> C. Saved with password with MS 2003, then remove password with r1355082
>
> Result:
> Scenario A:
> ods/xls/odt/odp work fine
> doc can saved with password successfully, but when reopen the saved file,
> it is under read-only mode. This also repro on OOo 3.3
> ppt is weird, in OOo 3.3, In saved dialog, the password check box can
> check,  input password and saved the file then reopen it, No need password,
> so saved with password in OOo3.3 for ppt format is not work.
> In trunk r1355082, In saved dialog, "saveing with password" checkbox is
> disabled
> If we saved ppt file with password protect by OpenOffice, then open in MS
> Office, no need input password, so it is totally not work.
>
> Scenario B:
> ods/xls/odt/odp work fine
> doc file with password open under read-only mode, we can saved to another
> file to remove password.
> ppt file can't saved with password protect
>
>
> Scenario C:
> xls work fine
> doc file with password open under read-only mode, we can saved to another
> file to remove password.
> ppt file with password protect by MS office can't open in Open Office, it
> said "Read Error. the loading of password-encrypted Microsoft PowerPint
> presentations is not supported."
>
> For PPT issue, there have 2 bugs about saved(Bug 39527) and loading(Bug
> 46307)
> For doc open with read-only mode issue, i think it is a know issue, but i
> can't find the bug in bugzilla, I will double check in bugzilla.
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:20:54 +0200
> > From: orwittm...@googlemail.com
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 28.06.2012 11:08, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > sorry for top posting - it is reply to the complete discussion
> regarding "save
> > > with password"
> > >
> > > This functionality for ODF documents is available when the build
> includes
> > > modules nss and moz.
> > >
> > > I am not sure, if our buildbots include these modules. I will check it.
> > >
> >
> > win7 buildbot includes nss and moz
> > linux32 buildbot includes nss and moz
> > linux64 buildbot includes nss and moz
> >
> > But, as you may have notice since a couple of days our buildbots have
> problems
> > to create new packages.
> > last sucessful build for win7 was on 2012-06-19
> > last sucessful build for linux32 was on 2012-06-20
> > last sucessful build for linxu64 was on 2012-06-17
> > none of these contains the fix for issue 119366
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
> > >
> > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > >
> > > On 28.06.2012 10:21, YangTerry wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Just confirm with our build owner, moz package is not in the build.
> > >> Will verify and update the result after download the trunk build from
> BuildBot.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks Fan Zheng help (*^__^*)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> From: polo8...@hotmail.com
> > >>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >>> Subject: RE: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file
> (119366)
> > >>> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:02:31 +0800
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Will confirm with our local build owner. Also download the trunk
> build from http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks for your investgate.
> > >>>
> > >>>> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:19:39 +0800
> > >>>> Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file
> (119366)
> > >>>> From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com
> > >>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hold a second, you guys are using the download build on verifying,
> right?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If so, that means some problems there. Maybe the release build env
> broken?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Hold a second, you guys are using the download build on verifying, right?

If so, that means some problems there. Maybe the release build env broken?


2012/6/28 Fan Zheng 

> Muhaha, lucky for me that I have 3 build enviroment on verification this,
> all of them are under Windows XP. The difference are:
> In build env A, there is no moz package involved;
> In build env B, there is moz package involved, but without my solution of
> issue 119366;
> In build env C, there is moz package involved and with my solution of
> issue 119366;
>
> And I did the following test cases:
> In env A:
> 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
> 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, failed, with error message "General
> Error: Generral input/output error";
> 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
> 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
> 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
> 2.2 Save into ODP, with password, failed, with error message "General
> Error: Generral input/output error";
> 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
> 2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
> Weird.
> 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
> 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, failed, with error message "General
> Error: Generral input/output error";
> 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
> 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
>
> In env B:
> 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
> 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
> 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
> 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
> 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
> 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
> 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
> 2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
> Weird.
> 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
> 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
> 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
> 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
> without password", failed;
>
> In env C:
> 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
> 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
> without password", Passed;
> 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
> 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
> without password", Passed;
> 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
> 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
> without password", Passed;
> 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
> 2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
> Weird.
> 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
> 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
> without password", Passed;
> 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
> 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
> without password", Passed;
>
> Conclution:
>
> Such error messages are caused missing moz package building involved.
> And such I/O error message only occurs in the ODF format file saving with
> password.
> Both ODF format saving with password and OFFICE format saving with
> password have the issue 119366;
> My solution could work on both MS office files saving and ODF format
> saving;
>
> For you review.
>
>
> 2012/6/28 YangTerry 
>
>>
>> I can saved .ods file without password successfully, also can save .xls
>> successfully.
>>
>> Only when i saved our format (like .ods) file with password, this error
>> pop up.
>>
>> Also failed to open our format file with password.
>>
>>
>>
>> So it should not be related with build without moz package.
>>
>>
>> > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:57:14 +0800
>> > Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
>> > From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com
>> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >
>> > And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng 
>> >
>> > > The error message "G

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Muhaha, lucky for me that I have 3 build enviroment on verification this,
all of them are under Windows XP. The difference are:
In build env A, there is no moz package involved;
In build env B, there is moz package involved, but without my solution of
issue 119366;
In build env C, there is moz package involved and with my solution of issue
119366;

And I did the following test cases:
In env A:
1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
1.2 Save into ODT, with password, failed, with error message "General
Error: Generral input/output error";
1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;
2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
2.2 Save into ODP, with password, failed, with error message "General
Error: Generral input/output error";
2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
Weird.
3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
3.2 Save into ODS, with password, failed, with error message "General
Error: Generral input/output error";
3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;

In env B:
1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;
1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;
2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;
2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
Weird.
3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;
3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: "Save As
without password", failed;

In env C:
1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed;
1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
without password", Passed;
1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed;
1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
without password", Passed;
2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed;
2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
without password", Passed;
2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed;
2.4 Save into PPT, the "saveing with password" checkbox is disabled...
Weird.
3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed;
3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
without password", Passed;
3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed;
3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; In continual case: "Save As
without password", Passed;

Conclution:

Such error messages are caused missing moz package building involved.
And such I/O error message only occurs in the ODF format file saving with
password.
Both ODF format saving with password and OFFICE format saving with password
have the issue 119366;
My solution could work on both MS office files saving and ODF format saving;

For you review.

2012/6/28 YangTerry 

>
> I can saved .ods file without password successfully, also can save .xls
> successfully.
>
> Only when i saved our format (like .ods) file with password, this error
> pop up.
>
> Also failed to open our format file with password.
>
>
>
> So it should not be related with build without moz package.
>
>
> > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:57:14 +0800
> > Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
> > From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >
> > And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng 
> >
> > > The error message "General Error: Generral input/output error" looks so
> > > farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside,
> such
> > > dialog will show up.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/6/28 YangTerry 
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384.
> > >> If we saved with our format(.ods)
> > >> Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is
> "General
> > >> Error: Generral input/output error", also failed open the password
> protect
> > >> .ods file, it pop up password incorrec

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced.



2012/6/28 Fan Zheng 

> The error message "General Error: Generral input/output error" looks so
> farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such
> dialog will show up.
>
>
>
>
> 2012/6/28 YangTerry 
>
>>
>> Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384.
>> If we saved with our format(.ods)
>> Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is "General
>> Error: Generral input/output error", also failed open the password protect
>> .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct
>> password. Reopen this bug.
>> My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls),
>> successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the
>> password.
>> Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password.
>>
>> Seems something wrong in our format save with password logic.
>>
>> > Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:27:56 +0200
>> > From: orwittm...@googlemail.com
>> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On 26.06.2012 14:05, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > On 26.06.2012 09:53, Fan Zheng wrote:
>> > >> Root cause:
>> > >>
>> > >> Seems the logic of "Save As" and "Save" inside Apache OpenOffice is
>> pretty
>> > >> weird anyway.
>> > >> A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for
>> storing
>> > >> file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such
>> method is
>> > >> responsible to:
>> > >>
>> > >> 1. Directly "Save" request, but exclude the very first time on "Save"
>> > >> without original URL path;
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. "SaveAs" request, with the same URL information as former;
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original
>> file, it
>> > >> is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient
>> > >> consideration. Which means,
>> > >> such function do not allow external saving parameters except the
>> ones on
>> > >> changing "Version Comments", "Author", "Interaction Handler" and
>> "status
>> > >> Indicator".
>> > >>
>> > >> C, "Saving with password" is a kind of external saving parameter. The
>> > >> saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users
>> have
>> > >> enable the check box
>> > >> "Save with password" in "File Save As" dialog. Otherwise, saving
>> parameters
>> > >> set wont contain password corresponding items.
>> > >>
>> > >> Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of
>> > >> following scenarios:
>> > >>
>> > >> 1. In the "Save" request, whatever the password originally enabled
>> or not,
>> > >> as no further different setting applied, the storing process will
>> directly
>> > >> apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and
>> password
>> > >> setting stuff. Everything is OK.
>> > >>
>> > >> 2. And in the "SaveAs" request with password originally disabled:
>> > >> 2.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" disabled in "File Save
>> As"
>> > >> dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will
>> directly
>> > >> apply the former saving parameters set, still with password
>> disabled. Keep
>> > >> the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high
>> efficiency;
>> > >> 2.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from disable to
>> enable in
>> > >> "File Save As" dialog, as external saving parameter was added into
>> saving
>> > >> parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters,
>> such
>> > >> "SaveAs" request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and
>> > >> actually finished inside the common "SaveAs" method with password
>&g

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

The error message "General Error: Generral input/output error" looks so
farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such
dialog will show up.



2012/6/28 YangTerry 

>
> Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384.
> If we saved with our format(.ods)
> Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is "General
> Error: Generral input/output error", also failed open the password protect
> .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct
> password. Reopen this bug.
> My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls),
> successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the
> password.
> Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password.
>
> Seems something wrong in our format save with password logic.
>
> > Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:27:56 +0200
> > From: orwittm...@googlemail.com
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 26.06.2012 14:05, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 26.06.2012 09:53, Fan Zheng wrote:
> > >> Root cause:
> > >>
> > >> Seems the logic of "Save As" and "Save" inside Apache OpenOffice is
> pretty
> > >> weird anyway.
> > >> A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for
> storing
> > >> file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such
> method is
> > >> responsible to:
> > >>
> > >> 1. Directly "Save" request, but exclude the very first time on "Save"
> > >> without original URL path;
> > >>
> > >> 2. "SaveAs" request, with the same URL information as former;
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original
> file, it
> > >> is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient
> > >> consideration. Which means,
> > >> such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones
> on
> > >> changing "Version Comments", "Author", "Interaction Handler" and
> "status
> > >> Indicator".
> > >>
> > >> C, "Saving with password" is a kind of external saving parameter. The
> > >> saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users
> have
> > >> enable the check box
> > >> "Save with password" in "File Save As" dialog. Otherwise, saving
> parameters
> > >> set wont contain password corresponding items.
> > >>
> > >> Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of
> > >> following scenarios:
> > >>
> > >> 1. In the "Save" request, whatever the password originally enabled or
> not,
> > >> as no further different setting applied, the storing process will
> directly
> > >> apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and
> password
> > >> setting stuff. Everything is OK.
> > >>
> > >> 2. And in the "SaveAs" request with password originally disabled:
> > >> 2.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" disabled in "File Save
> As"
> > >> dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will
> directly
> > >> apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled.
> Keep
> > >> the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high
> efficiency;
> > >> 2.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from disable to
> enable in
> > >> "File Save As" dialog, as external saving parameter was added into
> saving
> > >> parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters,
> such
> > >> "SaveAs" request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and
> > >> actually finished inside the common "SaveAs" method with password
> enabled.
> > >> Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result;
> > >>3. In the "SaveAs" request with password originally enabled:
> > >> 3.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" enabled in "File Save
> As"
> > >> dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters
> set,
> > >> which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such "SaveAs

Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963

[Fan Zheng]

Not the updated patch is already uploaded into bugzilla. For you review.
thanks.

2012/6/28 Fan Zheng 

> Hi, See my answer below in blue
>
> 2012/6/27 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 14.06.2012 14:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is the I implementation of  the proposal described in thread
>>>> "Propose
>>>> to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word
>>>> Binary Document"..review comments expected...
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zheng
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  Hi, all:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of
>>>>> bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot!
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the link:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> I am volunteering to review the patch.
>>>
>>>
>> Here is my first minor feedback on the patch:
>> The changes to /sw/inc/tox.hxx and the call of method 
>> 
>> in /sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par5.**cxx are not needed for enhancement
>> 119963 from my point of view. Right?
>> For me it looks like that these changes are already for the next
>> improvement step - exporting imported Microsoft Word TOC. Right?
>>
> Oliver, you are so right. Yes, such maMSTOCExpression corresponding stuff
> is not necessarily the case, and yes, those things are prepared fo
> exporting job of TOC in next step. I will remove them ASAP.
>
>
>> If yes, I would propose to remove this change for now.
>>
>> Back to the code for further review.
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>
>
>

Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, See my answer below in blue

2012/6/27 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 14.06.2012 14:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote:
>>
>>> This is the I implementation of  the proposal described in thread
>>> "Propose
>>> to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word
>>> Binary Document"..review comments expected...
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zheng
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>  Hi, all:
>>>>
>>>> This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of
>>>> bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot!
>>>>
>>>> Here is the link:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> I am volunteering to review the patch.
>>
>>
> Here is my first minor feedback on the patch:
> The changes to /sw/inc/tox.hxx and the call of method 
> 
> in /sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par5.**cxx are not needed for enhancement
> 119963 from my point of view. Right?
> For me it looks like that these changes are already for the next
> improvement step - exporting imported Microsoft Word TOC. Right?
>
Oliver, you are so right. Yes, such maMSTOCExpression corresponding stuff
is not necessarily the case, and yes, those things are prepared fo
exporting job of TOC in next step. I will remove them ASAP.


> If yes, I would propose to remove this change for now.
>
> Back to the code for further review.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>

Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963

[Fan Zheng]

I have attached a series of sample files for FVT in Bugzilla. For you
reference.

2012/6/14 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote:
>
>> This is the I implementation of  the proposal described in thread "Propose
>> to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word
>> Binary Document"..review comments expected...
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zheng
>>  wrote:
>>
>>  Hi, all:
>>>
>>> This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of
>>> bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot!
>>>
>>> Here is the link:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963>
>>>
>>>
>>
> I am volunteering to review the patch.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Now the new patch was updated onto bugzilla, for you review.

2012/6/26 Fan Zheng 

> Root cause:
>
> Seems the logic of "Save As" and "Save" inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty
> weird anyway.
> A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing
> file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is
> responsible to:
>
> 1. Directly "Save" request, but exclude the very first time on "Save"
> without original URL path;
>
> 2. "SaveAs" request, with the same URL information as former;
>
>
> B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it
> is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient
> consideration. Which means,
> such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on
> changing "Version Comments", "Author", "Interaction Handler" and "status
> Indicator".
>
> C, "Saving with password" is a kind of external saving parameter. The
> saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have
> enable the check box
> "Save with password" in "File Save As" dialog. Otherwise, saving
> parameters set wont contain password corresponding items.
>
> Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of
> following scenarios:
>
> 1. In the "Save" request, whatever the password originally enabled or not,
> as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly
> apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password
> setting stuff. Everything is OK.
>
> 2. And in the "SaveAs" request with password originally disabled:
> 2.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" disabled in "File Save As"
> dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly
> apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep
> the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency;
>  2.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from disable to enable
> in "File Save As" dialog, as external saving parameter was added into
> saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters,
> such "SaveAs" request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and
> actually finished inside the common "SaveAs" method with password enabled.
> Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result;
>  3. In the "SaveAs" request with password originally enabled:
> 3.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" enabled in "File Save As"
> dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set,
> which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such "SaveAs" request
> will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside
> the common "SaveAs" method with password enabled. Keep the consistence
> between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency;
>  3.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from enabled to disabled
> in "File Save As" dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing
> process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with
> password enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens.
>
> So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be:
>
> 1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2;
> 2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the
> originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher
> efficiency;
> 3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway;
>
>
> For you reference.
>
> The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later.
>
>
> 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 25.06.2012 13:32, Fan Zheng wrote:
>> > o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with
>> this
>> > issue. thanks a lot！
>>
>> No problem.
>> I have assigned this issue to you.
>> I am looking forward to see your solution.
>>
>> Best regards, Oliver.
>>
>> > 在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，"Oliver-Rainer Wittmann" > >写道：
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi, All:
>> >>>
>> >>> This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers.
>> >>>
>> >>> In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving
>> process,
>> >>> both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PA

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Root cause:

Seems the logic of "Save As" and "Save" inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty
weird anyway.
A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing
file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is
responsible to:

1. Directly "Save" request, but exclude the very first time on "Save"
without original URL path;

2. "SaveAs" request, with the same URL information as former;


B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it
is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient
consideration. Which means,
such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on
changing "Version Comments", "Author", "Interaction Handler" and "status
Indicator".

C, "Saving with password" is a kind of external saving parameter. The
saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have
enable the check box
"Save with password" in "File Save As" dialog. Otherwise, saving parameters
set wont contain password corresponding items.

Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of
following scenarios:

1. In the "Save" request, whatever the password originally enabled or not,
as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly
apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password
setting stuff. Everything is OK.

2. And in the "SaveAs" request with password originally disabled:
2.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" disabled in "File Save As"
dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly
apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep
the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency;
2.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from disable to enable in
"File Save As" dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving
parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such
"SaveAs" request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and
actually finished inside the common "SaveAs" method with password enabled.
Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result;
 3. In the "SaveAs" request with password originally enabled:
3.1 If the user keep the "Save with password" enabled in "File Save As"
dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set,
which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such "SaveAs" request
will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside
the common "SaveAs" method with password enabled. Keep the consistence
between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency;
3.2 If the user change the "Save with password" from enabled to disabled in
"File Save As" dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process
will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password
enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens.

So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be:

1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2;
2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the
originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher
efficiency;
3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway;


For you reference.

The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later.


2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi
>
> On 25.06.2012 13:32, Fan Zheng wrote:
> > o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with
> this
> > issue. thanks a lot！
>
> No problem.
> I have assigned this issue to you.
> I am looking forward to see your solution.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
> > 在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，"Oliver-Rainer Wittmann"  >写道：
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi, All:
> >>>
> >>> This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers.
> >>>
> >>> In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving
> process,
> >>> both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting
> password
> >>> on a document.
> >>> Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl(**) in file
> >>> SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.**cxx:line 595-599 please.
> >>> And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with
> >>> deselecting the check box of "Save with password", the result parameter
> >>> set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID
> inside
> >>> anymore, for indicating

Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor

[Fan Zheng]

Seeing my reply in following blue lines please:

2012/6/25 ZuoJun Chen 

> Hi,
>The idea sounds good to me. The task needs to accomplish piece by piece
> from my point of view.
>
> I'm look into text repaint process in word processor and trying to fix the
> character painting
>
> error in issue.119476 when inserting and deleting the text in first line of
> paragraph.
>
> Seems adding "additional spacing before paragraph" case to enlarge the
> repaint rectangle of paragraph line in
>
>  may be able to partially fix the problem.
>
> and the problem disturbs me is also how to store additional information :(
>
> 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > On 22.06.2012 18:18, Fan Zheng wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Oliver:
> >>
> >> In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should
> >> not
> >> change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem.
> >>
> >> So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now
> we
> >> know, Under the following situations:
> >> a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0;
> >> b. The type of line-spacing is "Exactly";
> >> c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height;
> >> MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional
> >> line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff
> commonly
> >> because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background
> height
> >> and flying object positing stuff.
> >>
> >> In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on
> >> representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings
> we
> >> talked about, and we want to fix it.
> >>
> >> So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion,
> we
> >> should consider  following candidates:
> >> a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above
> >> condition, as ZJ already done perfectly;
> >> b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard
> >> point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting
> >> (including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped
> already
> >> to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking
> method
> >> on working with "big" line spacing.  Such method may need to change the
> >> VisArea of a SwTxtFrm;
> >> c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I
> >> really
> >> do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there.
> >> d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this;
> >>
> >> So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very
> beginning
> >> of big works.
> >>
> >>
> > I agree to ZhengFan's analysis.
> >
> > Now, we need to discuss how we address these issues.
> >
> > My view one this is the following (propsal for discussion):
> > - Let us separate the stuff regarding the character painting and the
> > object positioning stuff in two issue. 119476 for the character painting,
> > new issue for the object positioning stuff.
> > - Character painting stuff:
> > -- I am in favor of a solution which does not change our intrinsic text
> > formatting and line portion creation algorithm. Thus, to solve the
> repaint
> > and selection problem we can store additional information - the
> additional
> > space taken by the character painting - at the  instance in
> order
> > to access it during painting and selection actions. The additional space
> > taken for the character painting is already part of the "frame area"
> > (member ), but not part of the "frame printing area"
> > (member ).
> >
>

1 Concern:

Could such additional information to be available in ODF Standard?
If not, whether it means that, the conversion from MS-Word Doc to ODT lead
different representation result?


> What do other think about it?
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
>

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with this
issue. thanks a lot！
在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，"Oliver-Rainer Wittmann" 写道：

> Hi,
>
> On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote:
>
>> Hi, All:
>>
>> This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers.
>>
>> In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process,
>> both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password
>> on a document.
>> Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl(**) in file
>> SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.**cxx:line 595-599 please.
>> And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with
>> deselecting the check box of "Save with password", the result parameter
>> set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside
>> anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern
>> about the password stuff anymore.
>> But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in
>> SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD
>> was
>> cleared, but  SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA  was not. The issue happens.
>>
>> For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA  clearing
>> in  SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD.
>>
>>
> I have reviewed the patch.
> Please see my comments in the issue [1] and [2]
>
> [1] 
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c9<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c9>
> [2] 
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c11<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c11>
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, All:

This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers.

In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process,
both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password
on a document.
Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl() in file
SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.cxx:line 595-599 please.
And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with
deselecting the check box of "Save with password", the result parameter
set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside
anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern
about the password stuff anymore.
But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in
SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD was
cleared, but  SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA  was not. The issue happens.

For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA  clearing
in  SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD.


2012/6/19 Jürgen Schmidt 

> On 6/18/12 1:16 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366
> >
> > This is a regression introduced in OOo 3.4 beta but not detected in
> > AOO 3.4 tested.   Once a password is set it cannot be removed.  Two
> > users have reported it.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> can we agree on subject line like
>
> [RELEASE][3.4.1]: 
>
> that makes it easier to track all release relevant things
>
>
> +1 for this issue
>
> Juergen
>
>
>

Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Oliver:

In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should not
change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem.

So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now we
know, Under the following situations:
a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0;
b. The type of line-spacing is "Exactly";
c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height;
MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional
line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff commonly
because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background height
and flying object positing stuff.

In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on
representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings we
talked about, and we want to fix it.

So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion, we
should consider  following candidates:
a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above
condition, as ZJ already done perfectly;
b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard
point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting
(including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped already
to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking method
on working with "big" line spacing.  Such method may need to change the
VisArea of a SwTxtFrm;
c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I really
do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there.
d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this;

So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very beginning
of big works.



2012/6/21 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 21.06.2012 11:23, Fan Zheng wrote:
>
>> Hi, All:
>>
>> Let me talk about my concern.
>>
>> Regarding the value is correct, there may exist the formatting mechanism
>> difference.
>>
>> 1. MS Word consider the above-paragraph-spacing  + line-spacing (may also
>> including the below-paragraph-spacing? not sure) as the available vertical
>> space for containing text;
>>
>
> My investigation of MS word 2003 and 2010 reveals the following:
> - the additional space of above-paragraph-spacing for rendering the text
> of the first text line.
> - the below-paragraph-spacing from the previous paragraph is _not_ used
> for rendering the text of the first text line.
> - for the character background and the paragraph background the
> above-paragraph-spacing is _not_ used. Thus, it looks very funny in MS Word
> 2003/2010 when the additional space is used for the characters, but not for
> the different backgrounds.
> - for object positioning the above-paragraph-spacing is used. Thus, an
> object whose vertical position is 0cm to the top of the line also looks
> funny from my point of view.
>
> My conclusion here is that MS Word is doing really inconsistent and funny
> things.
>
>
>  2. OpenOffice consider the ling-spacing only as the available vertical
>> space for containing text;
>>
>> Is that correct? If yes, then the inner value of line-spacing inside
>> SvxLineSpacingItem should actually equal to the value
>> of "above-paragraph-spacing  + line-spacing" stored in DOC files;
>> And in my opinion, such modification should be in filter but not in
>> formatting;
>>
>>
> Yes, for your question.
> But I disagree regarding adjusting the value of the SvxLineSpacingItem:
> (1) We have no SvxLineSpacingItem for the first line and the rest of the
> text lines. Such a features also does not exist in ODF. From my point of
> view such a feature does not make sense.
> (2) The above-paragaph-spacing belongs to the corresponding Svx...Item
> which represent the paragraphh margins.
> (3) MS Word is doing really inconsistent and funny things here. I am
> proposing _not_ to reflect these in our document model.
>
>
>  A further question is: as the total vertical space include above, line and
>> below are actually available for containing text, why MS Word trying to
>> distinguish them? On some other words, what the exact meaning of above and
>> below paragraph spacing in MS word?
>>
>>
> As I am not the expert of MS Word and its file format I can not answer
> these questions. From my point of view only MS experts can answer them.
>
>
>  And following the tips from Oliver, such value should only works on the
>> first line of paragraph. So whether it means that, the
>> above-paragraph-spacing has some kind of difference definition to the UL
>> space inside OpenOffice?
>>
>>
> Here, I am not sure, if I am getting the point.
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>

Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, All:

Let me talk about my concern.

Regarding the value is correct, there may exist the formatting mechanism
difference.

1. MS Word consider the above-paragraph-spacing  + line-spacing (may also
including the below-paragraph-spacing? not sure) as the available vertical
space for containing text;
2. OpenOffice consider the ling-spacing only as the available vertical
space for containing text;

Is that correct? If yes, then the inner value of line-spacing inside
SvxLineSpacingItem should actually equal to the value
of "above-paragraph-spacing  + line-spacing" stored in DOC files;
And in my opinion, such modification should be in filter but not in
formatting;

A further question is: as the total vertical space include above, line and
below are actually available for containing text, why MS Word trying to
distinguish them? On some other words, what the exact meaning of above and
below paragraph spacing in MS word?

And following the tips from Oliver, such value should only works on the
first line of paragraph. So whether it means that, the
above-paragraph-spacing has some kind of difference definition to the UL
space inside OpenOffice?



2012/6/20 Joost Andrae 

> Hi,
>
> Am 20.06.2012 13:43, schrieb ZuoJun Chen:
>
>  Hi, Fan
>>
>>  I have extracted parameter from first paragraph in sample file
>>
>> 1 Spacing before paragraph 18pt in doc file
>> 2 above-paragraph-spacing  in SvxULSpaceItem: 360
>> 3 line-spacing of said para in doc file: 12pt
>> 4 line-spacing of said para in SvxLineSpacingItem:240
>>
>> Seems that the value mapping works, Looking forward to your further
>> response:)
>>
>
> soffice internally uses twips and msoffice uses pt
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Twip 
>
> Above values are correct.
>
> Kind regards, Joost
>
>

Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor

[Fan Zheng]

Hi ZJ:

Sorry, perhaps I missed something. Would you please give me following data
of this specified sample file?

1. The exact value of the above-paragraph-spacing of said para, recorded in
the DOC file;
2. The exact value of the above-paragraph-spacing of said para, recorded in
SvxULSpaceItem, when trying to format it;
3. The exact value of the line-spacing of said para, recorded in the DOC
file;
4. The exact value of the line-spacing of said para, recorded in
SvxLineSpacingItem, when trying to format it;

By comparing the above values, we may confirm that, this is a value mapping
issue or, a strategy difference issue.

2012/6/20 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 20.06.2012 10:47, ZuoJun Chen wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>I'm trying to handle a bug on text clipped in document . See Bug
>> 119476
>> **>   for more
>> details.
>>
>> After investigation, I have some insights. When paragraph line spacing is
>> smaller than font size,
>>
>> the text contained becomes too large for fit, then AOO will clipped text
>> as Incomplete part. The code
>>
>>  for text clipped mechanism can be located in method
>>   at
>>
>> sw\source\core\text\itrform2.**cxx line 1756.
>>
>>
>> I thought that the preferable way to fix this would be to considering the
>> spacing contains above paragraph
>>
>> spacing property and line spacing property as the conditions to determine
>> whether clipping text. e.g.
>>
>> Clipped text if the sum of  adding above paragraph spacing  and line
>> paragraph spacing  is smaller than font size,
>>
>> otherwise do not clip text since above paragraph spacing and line spacing
>> are enough to display the text.
>>
>>
> From my point of view this change makes sense.
> If the text of the first line of a paragraph "founds" enough space in the
> "above paragraph spacing", the text should not be clipped.
>
> I had already looked at the patch and it looks ok.
> I will have a deeper look regarding how to determine the value of "above
> paragraph spacing". As far as I remember in some cases depending on certain
> compatibility option, the "above paragraph spacing" is not applied. E.g.,
> if the paragraph is the first on a page and compatibility option "Add
> paragraph and table spacing at tops of pages ..." is not checked, the
> "above paragraph spacing" is not applied.
> May be I find a solution to access the already calculated and applied
> "above paragraph spacing".
>
>
>
>> Noticed that there is a property named  below paragraph spacing, but I'm
>> not sure whether there is a need to consider this one,
>>
>> Do this property impact text clipped in paragraph?
>>
>>
> May be - I am not sure.
> Thus, a paragraph could have a "below paragraph spacing" and the first
> text line of the following paragraph could be to small. This would cause
> clipping, but may be the "below paragraph spacing" from the previous
> paragraph could be used to avoid the clipping.
> From my point of view avoid the clipping in this case would also make
> sense.
> May be my above mentioned further investigation regarding the available
> space above the first text line of a paragraph would solve this, too.
>
> Zuojun, do you know how MS Word will behave in this case?
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>

Re: Does MS Word Binary Document Contain the Page Count Info?

[Fan Zheng]

Hi,

Please take a look on Dop(Document Properties)::DopBase::cPg, which maybe
is what you want.

2012/6/18 chengjh 

> I want to get the exact page count info during loading a MS Word binary
> document,not from AOO after layout formatting.I have studied the
> specification of MS Word binary format,but I didn't find the description..I
> am afraid that I missed something..Anyone can give me a hand?Thanks.
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
>

Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)

[Fan Zheng]

I would like to take a look on this issue, maybe giving response in several
days.



2012/6/18 Raphael Bircher 

> Am 18.06.12 04:00, schrieb Xia Zhao:
> > Agree this should be taken as 341 release blocker considering this
> release
> > will fix security ones and critical regression.
> +1 to make this issue a release blocker
>
> Greetings Raphael
>
>
> --
> My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
>

Re: [Code] Build Error in bootstrap on Mac

[Fan Zheng]

hi, YongLin:

Although I did not met the same issue in Mac building process, I remember
that the OpenOffice build guide in Windows
has mentioned a similar issue. So perhaps you could take a look on it, some
kind of PERL package installation stuff.
Here is the link:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide/Building_on_Windows#installing_additional_perl_modules_in_cygwin


2012/6/15 Yong Lin Ma 

> Mac OS X 10.6
>
> Fresh code checked out yesterday (14 Jun)
>
> autoconf
>
> ./configure --with-dmake-url=
> http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2
> --with-epm-url=http://ftp.easysw.com/pub/epm/3.7/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz
> --disable-build-mozilla --enable-verbose --enable-category-b
> --enable-minimizer --enable-presenter-console --enable-wiki-publisher
> --disable-mozilla
>
> ./bootstrap
>
> source-9.0.0.7-bj.zip exists, md5 is OK
> ignoring silgraphite-2.3.1.tar.gz because its prerequisites are not
> fulfilled
> bsh-2.0b1-src.tar.gz exists, md5 is OK
> downloading 1 missing tar balls to /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/ext_sources
> downloading to
> /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/ext_sources/377a60170e5185eb63d3ed2fae98e621-README_silgraphite-2.3.1.txt.part
> Can't locate object method "show_progress" via package
> "LWP::UserAgent" at
> /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/main/solenv/bin/download_external_dependencies.pl
> line 442, <$in> line 352.
> making and entering /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/main/solenv/
> unxmacxi.pro/misc/build/
> can not find the dmake package
>
>
> Anyone can help? Thank you.
>

Introduction of myself

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, Everybody:

This is Zheng Fan speaking.

Well, I am a brand new face in AOO community, with subscribing the ooo-dev
mailing list just 2 weeks ago.
I start working in IBM Symhony project in 2003 and being focus in Word
Processor corresponding area since
2006, Before that, I was worked in the Presentation team for about 3 years.

Now, my mainly responsibility is on the issues and features in the core
function of Word Processor,
including data model, formatting and user behavior management. Also, I have
a little bit experience on the
MS Word 2003 binary format interoperability and Mac OS native
printing field.

Hope that my contribution could make AOO being more strong and fancy, and
help you people on issues and
requirements.

I would be very happen on communicating with all of you, on the issues,
suggestions, what ever.

That is all.

Thanks a lot!

yours Zheng Fan
2012-06-15

Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document

[Fan Zheng]

Well, good news. Then the efforts on TOC improvement stuff in ooxml filter
would be smaller. But sorry that I do not exactly know the detail process
of ooxml loading. l need some time on investigation.
在 2012-6-14 傍晚6:34，"Ying Zhang" 写道：

> thx Zheng Fan, yes, I'm thinking on the support of OOXML TOC import, and
> ooxml filter could support nested field, but I'm not sure whether it's the
> only blocker issue for ooxml toc support, do you have any idea about the
> solution?
>
>
> 2012/6/13 Fan Zheng 
>
> > to Zhang ying:
> > it is possible for ooxml filter on having this improvement, if the nested
> > fields could be supported.
> > 在 2012-5-30 上午9:58，"Ying Zhang" 写道：
> >
> > > I see only the improvement for interoperability with MS Binary file
> > format
> > > been mentioned. But since the same problems exist for MS OOXML file
> > format.
> > > Could we consider both and find whether we could define same mechanism
> > and
> > > same scope to make it consistence with each other.
> > > I would like to take the MS OOXML part.
> > >
> > > 2012/5/29 chengjh 
> > >
> > > > Oliver,welcome...
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
> > > > orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 29.05.2012 09:24, chengjh wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi All,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> TOC(Table of Contents) is a significant feature in Aoo
> > > > Writer..Although,it
> > > > >> has provided powerful capabilities to benefit end users for
> > > > productivity,
> > > > >> the followed areas,especially the fidelity with MS Word, still
> need
> > > > >> improvements..I propose them and put them as the candidates
> > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
> > > > >> AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning<
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
> > > > >
> > > > >> of
> > > > >> the next release for your comments...thanks.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 1)The TOC data of a MS Word document is not parsed completely.And
> > the
> > > > >> actual TOC data is from silently updating once a MS Word Document
> > > > >> loaded.Thus,the fidelity can not be ensured especially when the
> > > document
> > > > >> contents that impact TOC have been changed after creating TOC in
> MS
> > > > >> Word.So,we propose to implement the TOC loading process to replace
> > the
> > > > >> update action.
> > > > >> 2)The tab between chapter number and TOC entry lost when loading a
> > MS
> > > > Word
> > > > >> document,which leads to different gap between chapter number and
> TOC
> > > > >> entry.That looks different from MS Word.
> > > > >> 3)Jump info will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by
> > > un-checking
> > > > >> "Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers". To this kind of TOC,end
> > > users
> > > > >> can
> > > > >> only press ctrl+mouse to click the page number of the TOC entry
> for
> > > > >> jumping
> > > > >> in MS Word.
> > > > >> 4)The customized character attributes will be lost when loading MS
> > > Word
> > > > >> TOC
> > > > >> created by un-checking "Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers".
> To
> > > this
> > > > >> kind of TOC,the customized character attributes of the target
> > > paragraphs
> > > > >> can be collected into TOC in MS Word.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > > Such an improvement makes sense from my point of view.
> > > > >
> > > > > If possible I would help on this.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963

[Fan Zheng]

Hi, all:

This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of
bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot!

Here is the link:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963

Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document

[Fan Zheng]

to Zhang ying:
it is possible for ooxml filter on having this improvement, if the nested
fields could be supported.
在 2012-5-30 上午9:58，"Ying Zhang" 写道：

> I see only the improvement for interoperability with MS Binary file format
> been mentioned. But since the same problems exist for MS OOXML file format.
> Could we consider both and find whether we could define same mechanism and
> same scope to make it consistence with each other.
> I would like to take the MS OOXML part.
>
> 2012/5/29 chengjh 
>
> > Oliver,welcome...
> >
> > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <
> > orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > On 29.05.2012 09:24, chengjh wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi All,
> > >>
> > >> TOC(Table of Contents) is a significant feature in Aoo
> > Writer..Although,it
> > >> has provided powerful capabilities to benefit end users for
> > productivity,
> > >> the followed areas,especially the fidelity with MS Word, still need
> > >> improvements..I propose them and put them as the candidates
> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/**
> > >> AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning<
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning
> > >
> > >> of
> > >> the next release for your comments...thanks.
> > >>
> > >> 1)The TOC data of a MS Word document is not parsed completely.And the
> > >> actual TOC data is from silently updating once a MS Word Document
> > >> loaded.Thus,the fidelity can not be ensured especially when the
> document
> > >> contents that impact TOC have been changed after creating TOC in MS
> > >> Word.So,we propose to implement the TOC loading process to replace the
> > >> update action.
> > >> 2)The tab between chapter number and TOC entry lost when loading a MS
> > Word
> > >> document,which leads to different gap between chapter number and TOC
> > >> entry.That looks different from MS Word.
> > >> 3)Jump info will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by
> un-checking
> > >> "Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers". To this kind of TOC,end
> users
> > >> can
> > >> only press ctrl+mouse to click the page number of the TOC entry for
> > >> jumping
> > >> in MS Word.
> > >> 4)The customized character attributes will be lost when loading MS
> Word
> > >> TOC
> > >> created by un-checking "Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers". To
> this
> > >> kind of TOC,the customized character attributes of the target
> paragraphs
> > >> can be collected into TOC in MS Word.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Such an improvement makes sense from my point of view.
> > >
> > > If possible I would help on this.
> > >
> > > Best regards, Oliver.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
> >
>

Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document

[Fan Zheng]

you are right. I will change the design later.
Thanks a lot!
在 2012-6-13 晚上7:22，"Oliver-Rainer Wittmann" 写道：

> Hi,
>
> On 12.06.2012 16:20, chengjh wrote:
>
>> The function specification and design are ready for review now..Please
>> access  
>> http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOCto
>>  review the
>> FS section "Loading of MS Word TOC=>Binary Format=>Function Specification"
>>  and the design section  "Loading of MS Word TOC=>Binary Format=>Design
>> Description"..You are welcome to comment...thanks.
>>
>>
> I already had a look at the wiki and made some minor changes.
>
> Additionally, I think the we still want to "collect" certain paragraphs as
> headings, when we are loading the main content. But, we do not want to
> update the read TOC regarding the "collected" headings. Right?
> Thus, I propose to remove the sentence "Heading paragraphs collecting step
> removal, indicate the step 5 above;". I have already marked this sentence
> in the wiki by striking it.
> If this is ok, we can completely remove it.
>
>
> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>