[libreoffice-users] Re: Writer tutorial ready for upload
On 4/24/11 3:40 PM, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote: I would like to add this to the North American Community DVD in our Documentation page[s]. http://libreoffice-na.us/ opening page for project http://libreoffice-na.us/English/documentation.html Win/Mac/Linux DVD documentation page http://libreoffice-na.us/English-Windows/documentation.html Windows only DVD documentation page I've tried for the last two hours, and get a server connection reset in FireFox, as well as Safari. :-( -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] menu items with ~
Have you tried installing a different language pack to confirm then, say German since it's very closer to Dutch in form and syntax than English. And since the problem doesn't seem to exist in English - it does sound like you are right and it's a language pack issue. Which shouldn't be a huge problem to fix. I think the language packs can be edited using LO itself, and the updated language pack submitted to the project as a fix. Wayne On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Guy Voets wrote: > Hi Wayne, > > I changed the screen resolution to 1024x768, even to 680x400, but the > tildes remain. > Could it be because of the Dutch version I use? ... checking ... Yes > it is a bug (or feature?) in the Dutch LangPack... Si I'll post this > at the NL list. > Thanks for helping me find out. > -- > Guy > using LibO 3.3.2 on a iMac Intel DualCore Snow Leopard > -- please reply only to users@libreoffice.org -- > Dodoes can't afford to have headaches > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Cursor focus on reopening file
Jean-Francois, Thank you very much indeed. I filled in the name fields in the personal information. Closed the file I was working on and closed LO. Reopened LO and reopened the file and voila, it reopen the file at the saved location. This certainly is not obvious and I don't think I would have ever made the connection. Thank you again. Jerry At 03:09 PM 4/24/2011, you wrote: Hi, Le 24/04/2011 21:28, Libre User a écrit : Help! Is the problem with my OS settings? (I can't be sure that the Win7 settings are the same on both Win7 computers.) Something different between HP Win7 and Dell Win7? Or is it something in my configuration of LO? If so, is there a configuration setting I can change? Or was there an upgrade to LO that was somehow installed on my computer? Current LO version is listed as: LibreOffice 3.3.0 OOO330m19 (Build:6) tag libreoffice-3.3.0.4 Did you set you personal information in the Options dialog? This is known to generate the behaviour you're meeting when they are not set. -- Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice VS MS Office
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 17:57 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote: > On 04/24/2011 02:21 PM, Twayne wrote: > > The OP here sounds like no more than sour grapes to me based on his mostly > > wanting a free copy of MSO. LiberOffice is new and is NOT meant to simply > > replace MS Office. > I call LibreOffice an alternative to MSO, not a direct replacement. > Just like laptops are used at times instead of desktops, but there are > very few laptops that have the power and graphics [and heat > displacement] to replace most modern desktops. So we need to use > "alternative to" instead of "replacement for" when we describe > LibreOffice and MSO. > > > > There also seems to be a lot of pressure albeit indirect, > > to dispense with OO and LO meaning a myopic view of the world of office > ??? dispense with both OO and LO ??? I think that OO will die on its > own with Oracle dropping out of developing and supporting it. The key > will be if they sell the OOo name and trademark to some greedy company > or turn it over to the community that supports OOo. This Oracle > "dropping out" is one of the big reasons for LibreOffice being created > in the first place. > > suites, or a very staunch of MS. All those are fine but his stated views are > > pretty mixed up meaning he should take a step back and get a look at the > > forests instead of a few individual trees. MSOffice # OOo or LO. MSO is > > simply a large target area for LO/OO. > > > > In news:BANLkTi=o7YGpy03DyY8b+7K1sh_ao3A=3...@mail.gmail.com, > > e-letter typed: > A business that receives profits from customers that > demand to use M$ > >>> software should simply pay the licences to meet their > >>> customers' demands and consider it a cost of doing > >>> business. > > Software does not "pay the license" in any way you could look at it. > > Licenses are for users to know what can/cannot be done with the software. > > Those are choices the OP must live with as they won't be written to > > accomodate only him. > > > >>> I can't tell which of the following statements you mean: > > ... > >>> position, and use Microsoft products; > >>> > >> None, the example scenario is a customer (in any > >> business, not necessarily IT) sends a document in m$ word > >> and the recipient decides > >> to use LO but finds that there is (minor?) loss of > >> formatting (e.g. a table width greater than the body text > >> margin), then writes to LO mailing list to complain that > >> LO writer is not good enough for their needs. In this > >> scenario, the business using LO should pay for an m$ > >> licence to use m$ software in their business and not use > >> LO at all. > > Yes. It's a matter of using what fits one's own specific needs and wants. If > > the OP is in a position where he must make such decisions, he needs to be > > asking for a transfer from the sound of it. > > > >> LO should concentrate on the scenario that both a > >> business customer > >> and supplier are _both_ using LO software and when > >> documents are exchanged, the documents produced and > >> received using LO software are found to be of good > >> quality (i.e. no bugs). > > LO should concentrate on whatever path appears to be the most lucrative > > based on what is viewed as the desired future for the product. As in, read > > their Mission Statement for such information; it'll clarify better than can > > be done here. > > > >> It is not fair for LO to be expected to be an exact clone > >> of m$ products. > > Exactly! Nor is it expected to be an exact clone of any other product such > > as the WordPerfect capabilities, PDF, and a host of others. The expectation > > is to meet or exceed the needs of the largest set of users as is possible. > > Being a clone of MSO would not accomplish that. > > > Any business using open source software to generate a > private profit should put their money where their mouth > is; > > That's a senseless and meaningless paragraph that only the OP is likely > > aware of what it means. > > > >>> a) Do you know how many employees the "average" business > >>> in the united states has? > > That's irrelevant. > > > >> Don't understand the significance. > >> > >>> b) Do you have any idea how difficult it was for non-Sun > >>> clients to get features and functions added to OOo? > > Well, if you were contributing to the development and marketing of OOo or LO > > in any meaningful way, you would understand that better. YOUR wants& needs > > are not necessarily even close to what the majority needs/wants. You seem to > > have taken a completely personal, egotistical approach to things here and > > it's not helping whatever point it is you wish to make. > > > >> No, but presumably this justifies the creation of LO. > >> > >>> c) Do you have any idea what the learning curve involved > >>> in knowing how to code for OOo was/is? > > I have a smattering of a feeling for it. Some parts are trivial, some are > > complex, and some are bugg
Re: [libreoffice-users] Cursor focus on reopening file
Hi, Le 24/04/2011 21:28, Libre User a écrit : Help! Is the problem with my OS settings? (I can't be sure that the Win7 settings are the same on both Win7 computers.) Something different between HP Win7 and Dell Win7? Or is it something in my configuration of LO? If so, is there a configuration setting I can change? Or was there an upgrade to LO that was somehow installed on my computer? Current LO version is listed as: LibreOffice 3.3.0 OOO330m19 (Build:6) tag libreoffice-3.3.0.4 Did you set you personal information in the Options dialog? This is known to generate the behaviour you're meeting when they are not set. -- Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice VS MS Office
On 04/24/2011 02:21 PM, Twayne wrote: The OP here sounds like no more than sour grapes to me based on his mostly wanting a free copy of MSO. LiberOffice is new and is NOT meant to simply replace MS Office. I call LibreOffice an alternative to MSO, not a direct replacement. Just like laptops are used at times instead of desktops, but there are very few laptops that have the power and graphics [and heat displacement] to replace most modern desktops. So we need to use "alternative to" instead of "replacement for" when we describe LibreOffice and MSO. There also seems to be a lot of pressure albeit indirect, to dispense with OO and LO meaning a myopic view of the world of office ??? dispense with both OO and LO ??? I think that OO will die on its own with Oracle dropping out of developing and supporting it. The key will be if they sell the OOo name and trademark to some greedy company or turn it over to the community that supports OOo. This Oracle "dropping out" is one of the big reasons for LibreOffice being created in the first place. suites, or a very staunch of MS. All those are fine but his stated views are pretty mixed up meaning he should take a step back and get a look at the forests instead of a few individual trees. MSOffice # OOo or LO. MSO is simply a large target area for LO/OO. In news:BANLkTi=o7YGpy03DyY8b+7K1sh_ao3A=3...@mail.gmail.com, e-letter typed: A business that receives profits from customers that demand to use M$ software should simply pay the licences to meet their customers' demands and consider it a cost of doing business. Software does not "pay the license" in any way you could look at it. Licenses are for users to know what can/cannot be done with the software. Those are choices the OP must live with as they won't be written to accomodate only him. I can't tell which of the following statements you mean: ... position, and use Microsoft products; None, the example scenario is a customer (in any business, not necessarily IT) sends a document in m$ word and the recipient decides to use LO but finds that there is (minor?) loss of formatting (e.g. a table width greater than the body text margin), then writes to LO mailing list to complain that LO writer is not good enough for their needs. In this scenario, the business using LO should pay for an m$ licence to use m$ software in their business and not use LO at all. Yes. It's a matter of using what fits one's own specific needs and wants. If the OP is in a position where he must make such decisions, he needs to be asking for a transfer from the sound of it. LO should concentrate on the scenario that both a business customer and supplier are _both_ using LO software and when documents are exchanged, the documents produced and received using LO software are found to be of good quality (i.e. no bugs). LO should concentrate on whatever path appears to be the most lucrative based on what is viewed as the desired future for the product. As in, read their Mission Statement for such information; it'll clarify better than can be done here. It is not fair for LO to be expected to be an exact clone of m$ products. Exactly! Nor is it expected to be an exact clone of any other product such as the WordPerfect capabilities, PDF, and a host of others. The expectation is to meet or exceed the needs of the largest set of users as is possible. Being a clone of MSO would not accomplish that. Any business using open source software to generate a private profit should put their money where their mouth is; That's a senseless and meaningless paragraph that only the OP is likely aware of what it means. a) Do you know how many employees the "average" business in the united states has? That's irrelevant. Don't understand the significance. b) Do you have any idea how difficult it was for non-Sun clients to get features and functions added to OOo? Well, if you were contributing to the development and marketing of OOo or LO in any meaningful way, you would understand that better. YOUR wants& needs are not necessarily even close to what the majority needs/wants. You seem to have taken a completely personal, egotistical approach to things here and it's not helping whatever point it is you wish to make. No, but presumably this justifies the creation of LO. c) Do you have any idea what the learning curve involved in knowing how to code for OOo was/is? I have a smattering of a feeling for it. Some parts are trivial, some are complex, and some are buggy. I would assume that anyone taking on a coder would mean that coder already has the needed background on his own or he's not going to be taken very seriously. LO is not a learn-to-code project, it's something entirely different. This is one of the advantages of open source; the many can contrubute and the best chosen as the way to go. No, not qualified to comment. Those three factors mitigated against organizations that were not in the IT industry from even consi
Re: [libreoffice-users] Writer tutorial ready for upload
On 04/24/2011 12:30 AM, parichaycomputer wrote: Dear Documentation Team, i already finish the writer tutorial for novice to advance learners. I have an alfresco account. Please guide me about the following points: a) Can i upload it in alfresco account? Is it visible to all? b) How can i get the valuable suggestions from libreoffice documentation team about my tutorial. c) How can i know that the tutorials are accepted by the libreoffice? Thank you for reading my letter with patience. With Regards, Parichay Chakrabarti -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Writer-tutorial-ready-for-upload-tp2857014p2857014.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. I would not mind getting this tutorial emailed to me - off the list - at "webmas...@krackedpress.com" I am not on thew documentation list[s]. I would like to add this to the North American Community DVD in our Documentation page[s]. http://libreoffice-na.us/ opening page for project http://libreoffice-na.us/English/documentation.html Win/Mac/Linux DVD documentation page http://libreoffice-na.us/English-Windows/documentation.html Windows only DVD documentation page http://libreoffice-na.us/Spanish/index.html Spanish version - Win/Mac/Linux pages http://libreoffice-na.us/Spanish-Windows/index.htmlSpanish version - Windows only pages -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Cursor focus on reopening file
I have a problem that I hope this group can help me with. Simply stated, I work with very large documents, some in excess of 100 pages. They are either created in odt format or converted from doc or docx to odt when I get them. While working with these documents, if I save the file and then close it, it reopens at the beginning of the file, not at point in the document where I stopped working and saved it. To find my previous stopping point, I generally insert a string of "x's" so that I can find my stopping point but sometimes I forget. LO did not do this on 2 other computers that I used previously. OO did not do this originally either but the problem appeared with v. 3. I have recently had to move to a new laptop computer. This problem did not happen with LO installations on my 2 previous laptops. The first one, an HP running MS Vista and the second, an HP running Windows 7. The Vista laptop had this problem with OO v. 3 but it disappeared with the initial installation of LO. When the HP Vista laptop failed, LO was installed on a new HP laptop running Win7 and it always opened my files at the previous save point. LO was installed clean (from the same saved installation file that I used on the Vista computer) on the Win7 laptop and the problem did not occur. That new Win7 laptop was unsatisfactory, it was returned and replaced with the current Dell Win7 and again LO was installed from the original LO download. Now the odt files no longer open at the previous save point. Help! Is the problem with my OS settings? (I can't be sure that the Win7 settings are the same on both Win7 computers.) Something different between HP Win7 and Dell Win7? Or is it something in my configuration of LO? If so, is there a configuration setting I can change? Or was there an upgrade to LO that was somehow installed on my computer? Current LO version is listed as: LibreOffice 3.3.0 OOO330m19 (Build:6) tag libreoffice-3.3.0.4 Jerry -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Writer tutorial ready for upload
Hi Wayne, :-) On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 19:34, Wayne Borean wrote: > It's nice that you answered his questions in the Documentation mailing list, > however us users also have an interest. Oh, sure, OK. You can read the thread at [1]. Please feel free to ask any questions you want. [1] http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/application-for-document-writer-td2831277.html David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: ODF format validity
Il 24/04/2011 20:04, NoOp ha scritto: On 04/24/2011 01:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: Le 23/04/2011 11:00, Milos Sramek a écrit : Dňa 22.04.2011 23:44, Wayne Borean wrote / napísal(a): What file? Send copy as attachment. It looks like that all tests, presented at http://www.officeshots.org/galleries, fail because of a single issue. It can be seen also in the attached file a. odf. This is the log from http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/: Result for a.odt This file is NOT valid Result details: upload:///a.odt:Info:ODF Version: 1.2 Perhaps the problem is there : change default ODF version used by your LibreOffice and try again. Menu Tools> Options> Load/Save> General I ran a few tests as well at http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/ I created a single document with LO 3.3.2, Ubuntu OOo 3.2, Standard OOo 3.3.0, and Standard OOo-Dev (3.4.0). All failed with 1.2 extended with the exception of OOo-Dev (3.4.0). With OOo-Dev 3.4.0: ODF Validator Result Page Result for OOoDev34_odftTest.odt This file is valid Errors whith LO 3.3.2, Ubuntu OOo 3.2, and Standard OOo 3.3.0, were consistent 'Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute': upload:///LO332_odfTest.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///LO332_odfTest.odt:Info:Generator: LibreOffice/3.3$Linux LibreOffice_project/330m19$Build-202 Result details: upload:///SOOo330_odfTest.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///SOOo330_odfTest.odt:Info:Generator: OpenOffice.org/3.3$Linux OpenOffice.org_project/330m20$Build-9567 When changing the format to 1.0/1.1: ODF Validator Result Page Result for LO332_odfTest_ODF1.odt This file is valid and ODF Validator Result Page Result for SOOo330_odfTest_ODF1.odt This file is valid Note: 1.2 (not extended) fails on all as well - with the exception of OOo-Dev (3.4.0). Also, I first tested a Word97 document that I'd used in a bug report (saved as odt) and that doc carries over a style that the odf test doesn't like: upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt/styles.xml[2,12196]:Error:unexpected attribute "style:layout-grid-snap-to-characters" upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt:Info:Generator: LibreOffice/3.3$Linux LibreOffice_project/330m19$Build-202 This file is NOT valid Result details: upload:///Word97Test_OOoDev.odt/styles.xml[2,12124]:Error:unexpected attribute "style:layout-grid-snap-to-characters" upload:///Word97Test_OOoDev.odt:Info:Generator: OOo-dev/3.4$Linux OpenOffice.org_project/340m0$Build-9583 so I recommend testing using just a cleanly generated file (like I did afterwards) for the tests. Very interesting results... we have to deal with them as soon as possible... If Libò 3.4.0 will be merged again with the last OOo 3.4.0 commits without loosing all the code cleaning (Code Hacks) efforts we could have the same "The file is valid" also for Libò 3.4.0. Happy Easter evening, Carlo -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice VS MS Office
The OP here sounds like no more than sour grapes to me based on his mostly wanting a free copy of MSO. LiberOffice is new and is NOT meant to simply replace MS Office. There also seems to be a lot of pressure albeit indirect, to dispense with OO and LO meaning a myopic view of the world of office suites, or a very staunch of MS. All those are fine but his stated views are pretty mixed up meaning he should take a step back and get a look at the forests instead of a few individual trees. MSOffice # OOo or LO. MSO is simply a large target area for LO/OO. In news:BANLkTi=o7YGpy03DyY8b+7K1sh_ao3A=3...@mail.gmail.com, e-letter typed: >>> A business that receives profits from customers that >>> demand to use M$ >> software should simply pay the licences to meet their >> customers' demands and consider it a cost of doing >> business. Software does not "pay the license" in any way you could look at it. Licenses are for users to know what can/cannot be done with the software. Those are choices the OP must live with as they won't be written to accomodate only him. >> >> I can't tell which of the following statements you mean: ... >> position, and use Microsoft products; >> > > None, the example scenario is a customer (in any > business, not necessarily IT) sends a document in m$ word > and the recipient decides > to use LO but finds that there is (minor?) loss of > formatting (e.g. a table width greater than the body text > margin), then writes to LO mailing list to complain that > LO writer is not good enough for their needs. In this > scenario, the business using LO should pay for an m$ > licence to use m$ software in their business and not use > LO at all. Yes. It's a matter of using what fits one's own specific needs and wants. If the OP is in a position where he must make such decisions, he needs to be asking for a transfer from the sound of it. > > LO should concentrate on the scenario that both a > business customer > and supplier are _both_ using LO software and when > documents are exchanged, the documents produced and > received using LO software are found to be of good > quality (i.e. no bugs). LO should concentrate on whatever path appears to be the most lucrative based on what is viewed as the desired future for the product. As in, read their Mission Statement for such information; it'll clarify better than can be done here. > > It is not fair for LO to be expected to be an exact clone > of m$ products. Exactly! Nor is it expected to be an exact clone of any other product such as the WordPerfect capabilities, PDF, and a host of others. The expectation is to meet or exceed the needs of the largest set of users as is possible. Being a clone of MSO would not accomplish that. > >>> Any business using open source software to generate a >>> private profit should put their money where their mouth >>> is; That's a senseless and meaningless paragraph that only the OP is likely aware of what it means. >> >> a) Do you know how many employees the "average" business >> in the united states has? That's irrelevant. > > Don't understand the significance. > >> b) Do you have any idea how difficult it was for non-Sun >> clients to get features and functions added to OOo? Well, if you were contributing to the development and marketing of OOo or LO in any meaningful way, you would understand that better. YOUR wants & needs are not necessarily even close to what the majority needs/wants. You seem to have taken a completely personal, egotistical approach to things here and it's not helping whatever point it is you wish to make. > > No, but presumably this justifies the creation of LO. > >> c) Do you have any idea what the learning curve involved >> in knowing how to code for OOo was/is? I have a smattering of a feeling for it. Some parts are trivial, some are complex, and some are buggy. I would assume that anyone taking on a coder would mean that coder already has the needed background on his own or he's not going to be taken very seriously. LO is not a learn-to-code project, it's something entirely different. This is one of the advantages of open source; the many can contrubute and the best chosen as the way to go. >> > > No, not qualified to comment. > >> Those three factors mitigated against organizations that >> were not in the IT industry from even considering >> customizations of OOo, much less paying for them. This is irrelevant to the development of OOo/LO and those three factors have so little to do with it that it almost makes me laugh. I certainly had to smile smugly at this post when I first read the misinformative little rage. >> > > Is it not true that organisations are not able to get > customisations > of m$o unless they pay m$ and/or m$ partners to make such > changes? I believe that is true, and it takes deep pockets for the most part to create such unique and specialized ware. Usually changes are going to be made by third parties as the originators are
[libreoffice-users] Re: ODF format validity
On 04/24/2011 01:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: > Le 23/04/2011 11:00, Milos Sramek a écrit : >> Dňa 22.04.2011 23:44, Wayne Borean wrote / napísal(a): >>> What file? >>> >>> Send copy as attachment. >> It looks like that all tests, presented at >> http://www.officeshots.org/galleries, fail because of a single issue. It >> can be seen also in the attached file a. odf. This is the log from >> http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/: >> >> >> Result for a.odt >> >> This file is NOT valid >> >> Result details: >> >> upload:///a.odt:Info:ODF Version: 1.2 > > Perhaps the problem is there : change default ODF version used by your > LibreOffice and try again. > Menu Tools > Options > Load/Save > General I ran a few tests as well at http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/ I created a single document with LO 3.3.2, Ubuntu OOo 3.2, Standard OOo 3.3.0, and Standard OOo-Dev (3.4.0). All failed with 1.2 extended with the exception of OOo-Dev (3.4.0). With OOo-Dev 3.4.0: ODF Validator Result Page Result for OOoDev34_odftTest.odt This file is valid Errors whith LO 3.3.2, Ubuntu OOo 3.2, and Standard OOo 3.3.0, were consistent 'Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute': upload:///LO332_odfTest.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///LO332_odfTest.odt:Info:Generator: LibreOffice/3.3$Linux LibreOffice_project/330m19$Build-202 Result details: upload:///SOOo330_odfTest.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///SOOo330_odfTest.odt:Info:Generator: OpenOffice.org/3.3$Linux OpenOffice.org_project/330m20$Build-9567 When changing the format to 1.0/1.1: ODF Validator Result Page Result for LO332_odfTest_ODF1.odt This file is valid and ODF Validator Result Page Result for SOOo330_odfTest_ODF1.odt This file is valid Note: 1.2 (not extended) fails on all as well - with the exception of OOo-Dev (3.4.0). Also, I first tested a Word97 document that I'd used in a bug report (saved as odt) and that doc carries over a style that the odf test doesn't like: upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt/META-INF/manifest.xml[2,88]:Error:element "manifest:manifest" is missing "version" attribute upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt/styles.xml[2,12196]:Error:unexpected attribute "style:layout-grid-snap-to-characters" upload:///Word97Test_wLO.odt:Info:Generator: LibreOffice/3.3$Linux LibreOffice_project/330m19$Build-202 This file is NOT valid Result details: upload:///Word97Test_OOoDev.odt/styles.xml[2,12124]:Error:unexpected attribute "style:layout-grid-snap-to-characters" upload:///Word97Test_OOoDev.odt:Info:Generator: OOo-dev/3.4$Linux OpenOffice.org_project/340m0$Build-9583 so I recommend testing using just a cleanly generated file (like I did afterwards) for the tests. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Difficulty with Page Up, Page Down, and scrolling
I have been using a Logitech Trackball without problems with both OpenOffice and then with LibreOffice. My suggestion is that first you go to the Logitech web site and download the latest drivers for the trackball. After installing the new driver, go to Control Panel --->Mouse Settings. You should be able to select what operation you want each button and the wheel to do. My wife's computer has XP and when she installed a Logitech Wheel Mouse, we had to reset the operation of the wheel so that it did not scroll an entire page with each click of the wheel. Jerry At 10:15 PM 4/23/2011, you wrote: Hi -- I switched from OpenOffice to LibreOffice when I read the claim that Libre code seems better and tighter than Open. I had some favorite pointer devices (called Felix (Latin for "cat") rather than mouse -- but these got worn out. Then someone gave me a used Logitech trackball, which I can also use without destroying my wrists. With LibreOffice 3.3.0 and the three-button trackball, the Writer program rather quickly became non-functional. If I clicked on the Page Up or Page Down, or with the trackball, the program would not jump to the new position. Instead, it would "scroll" one line a second, keeping the rest of the computer paralyzed, until it had moved by a whole page. Clicking in the "elevator" to go up or down on the page similarly scrolled in this impaired slow motion. I can't work -- write papers -- under such conditions. I have no idea how to go about fixing this problem. I can't write or edit papers with LibreOffice, with this problem -- which leaves me using Microsoft Word (which I would rather not do). My operating system: Windows XP Professional (or UberStudent distribution of Ubuntu Linux, which I have little skill in using, so far.) I don't know just what other information someone better with computers than I might want. Please tell/show me how to fix this problem. Andy Hilgartner -- C. A. HilgartnerPhone: 660-627-2519 2413 North East Street Email: c...@hilgart.org Kirksville MO 63501 USA URL: www.hilgart.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] menu items with ~
Hi Wayne, I changed the screen resolution to 1024x768, even to 680x400, but the tildes remain. Could it be because of the Dutch version I use? ... checking ... Yes it is a bug (or feature?) in the Dutch LangPack... Si I'll post this at the NL list. Thanks for helping me find out. -- Guy using LibO 3.3.2 on a iMac Intel DualCore Snow Leopard -- please reply only to users@libreoffice.org -- Dodoes can't afford to have headaches -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Writer tutorial ready for upload
On 4/24/11 2:08 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Parichay, :-) I answered these questions in your message on the documentation mailing list. David Nelson On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:30, parichaycomputer wrote: Dear Documentation Team, i already finish the writer tutorial for novice to advance learners. I have an alfresco account. Please guide me about the following points: a) Can i upload it in alfresco account? Is it visible to all? b) How can i get the valuable suggestions from libreoffice documentation team about my tutorial. c) How can i know that the tutorials are accepted by the libreoffice? Thank you for reading my letter with patience. With Regards, Parichay Chakrabarti I have to agree with Wayne's post about the manual. I'd download it in a heart beat if I knew where to find it. I've got the OO manual, and at best I was disappointed in it. For me, it was mostly useless. :-( I'd appreciate it if you would post a link to it. There is a Mac customized version of Open Office called NeoOffice. A couple of users created a manual for NeoOffice, and it's better IMO than the Open Office manual. It can be found here: http://neowiki.neooffice.org/index.php/Documentation_and_Related_Resources The page talks a lot about the manual being for version 2, but when you download it, the title page says it's been updated for version 3. It's still not as comprehensive as I would like to see. This was my first office package on my Mac, other than iWork that came with the system, and my first exposure to Open Office and others. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Writer tutorial ready for upload
David, It's nice that you answered his questions in the Documentation mailing list, however us users also have an interest. Documentation was always one of OpenOffice's weak points. It supposedly existed. Trying to find it on the website was an exercise in frustration. In fact I got a hell of a lot more help out of Google than I ever got out o the OO.ORG site. That this discussion was taking place here where the users could see it, was damned useful. At least we knew someone was working on something, and I was going to write a short (100 word) blurb about it and link to it when it went live. Do it in the Documentation list, which I don't follow (I can only follow so many lists per day) and that won't happen. So think. Do you want to have the discussion where no one will see it, and post the documentation where now one will know where it is? Wayne On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:08 AM, David Nelson wrote: > Hi Parichay, :-) > > I answered these questions in your message on the documentation mailing > list. > > David Nelson > > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:30, parichaycomputer > wrote: > > Dear Documentation Team, > > i already finish the writer tutorial for novice to advance learners. I > have > > an alfresco account. Please guide me about the following points: > > > > a) Can i upload it in alfresco account? Is it visible to all? > > b) How can i get the valuable suggestions from libreoffice documentation > > team about my tutorial. > > c) How can i know that the tutorials are accepted by the libreoffice? > > > > Thank you for reading my letter with patience. > > > > With Regards, > > Parichay Chakrabarti > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] ODF format validity
JBF, Change it to what? Version 1? Version 1.1? Version 0.9? Be specific. Wayne On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure wrote: > Le 23/04/2011 11:00, Milos Sramek a écrit : > > Dňa 22.04.2011 23:44, Wayne Borean wrote / napísal(a): > >> What file? > >> > >> Send copy as attachment. > > It looks like that all tests, presented at > > http://www.officeshots.org/galleries, fail because of a single issue. It > > can be seen also in the attached file a. odf. This is the log from > > http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/: > > > > > > Result for a.odt > > > > This file is NOT valid > > > > Result details: > > > > upload:///a.odt:Info:ODF Version: 1.2 > > Perhaps the problem is there : change default ODF version used by your > LibreOffice and try again. > Menu Tools > Options > Load/Save > General > > > Best regards > JBF > -- > Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] menu items with ~
Guy, Beta 2, OS X 10.6.7, current patches, and I'm not seeing tildes on any menus. I specifically checked the ones you mentioned, and don't see them. The only difference is I have a 13" MacBook Pro, so my display size is a lot smaller than yours. I wonder if that is part of the explanation. Could you change your screen resolution to something stupidly low like 1024x768 and see if the Tildes disappear? Wayne On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Guy Voets wrote: > )Hello, > > I installed the 2nd beta for LibO 3.4.0 (DEV300m103 (Build:2) on my > Intel iMac with OSX 10.6.7. > This version seems to work OK, contary to the 1st beta that wouldn't even > start. > > What I found, is that menu items like OK, Annul are now sometimes > preceeded by a til or tilde (~). > Is this a bug or has it a function? The ~ appears e.g. in the Paste > Special dialog, Insert Table dialog, Word Count dialog... > but not in others as Save As, Speller... > > -- > Guy > using LibO 3.3.2 on a iMac Intel DualCore Snow Leopard > -- please reply only to users@libreoffice.org -- > Dodoes can't afford to have headaches > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] menu items with ~
)Hello, I installed the 2nd beta for LibO 3.4.0 (DEV300m103 (Build:2) on my Intel iMac with OSX 10.6.7. This version seems to work OK, contary to the 1st beta that wouldn't even start. What I found, is that menu items like OK, Annul are now sometimes preceeded by a til or tilde (~). Is this a bug or has it a function? The ~ appears e.g. in the Paste Special dialog, Insert Table dialog, Word Count dialog... but not in others as Save As, Speller... -- Guy using LibO 3.3.2 on a iMac Intel DualCore Snow Leopard -- please reply only to users@libreoffice.org -- Dodoes can't afford to have headaches -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] ODF format validity
Le 23/04/2011 11:00, Milos Sramek a écrit : > Dňa 22.04.2011 23:44, Wayne Borean wrote / napísal(a): >> What file? >> >> Send copy as attachment. > It looks like that all tests, presented at > http://www.officeshots.org/galleries, fail because of a single issue. It > can be seen also in the attached file a. odf. This is the log from > http://tools.odftoolkit.org/odfvalidator/: > > > Result for a.odt > > This file is NOT valid > > Result details: > > upload:///a.odt:Info:ODF Version: 1.2 Perhaps the problem is there : change default ODF version used by your LibreOffice and try again. Menu Tools > Options > Load/Save > General Best regards JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Writer tutorial ready for upload
Hi Parichay, :-) I answered these questions in your message on the documentation mailing list. David Nelson On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:30, parichaycomputer wrote: > Dear Documentation Team, > i already finish the writer tutorial for novice to advance learners. I have > an alfresco account. Please guide me about the following points: > > a) Can i upload it in alfresco account? Is it visible to all? > b) How can i get the valuable suggestions from libreoffice documentation > team about my tutorial. > c) How can i know that the tutorials are accepted by the libreoffice? > > Thank you for reading my letter with patience. > > With Regards, > Parichay Chakrabarti -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
