date:20140205



I use 4.1.4 on Ubuntu
I only had View / Print Layout, Web Layout when viewing an HTML file.

Then I played around with the LO Writer and Writer/Web options, plus the 
Internet options.
After I added the browser plug-in optional check-box, the page now had  
View/HTML_Source.
I did not save the HTML file, since I did not want any changes to the 
web page.
Now that HTML file opens and always shows the View HTML_source, but then 
opening a second HTML file along with the first one, afer I unchecked 
everything I thought I changed, it opens without the HTML_Source 
option.  Two files opened at the same time and one has the View 
HTML_Source and the other does not.


SO, why is one now showing that HTML source option and the other does 
not.  The HTML_Source one did not originally have that option till I did 
some check-box adding.  So something changed to see the HTML source code 
in Writer for the original and not for the next one.


YES, it is weird.

Well, now I just opened the first file and it is no longer showing the 
HTML_Source view option.  Weirder yet.


It might have something to do with the Field Code check-box in 
Writer/Web, and the Internet / Browser Plug-in / Display documents in 
browser check-box.  Right now, I have the field code check-box checked 
in Writer, but not in Writer/Web.


So do you have the Field Code check-boxes checked in one or both 
Writer/Web view and Writer view options, and the browser plug-in checked?


Why you see the view source option for one file and then not for another 
is a mystery.  Was there some script tagged with the original file for 
a bit so it would show the HTML source view but not tagged with the 
other file.  Then get untagged with the first one after playing around 
again with the check-boxes during the viewing of the file, so the LO 
shut down and then opening the first page again after restarting LO.


SO, this source viewing and non source viewing of the HTML files/pages 
is in Ubuntu's 4.1.4 [64-bit] version and not just in 4.2.0.4.


ALSO, it seems to open differently with how the page is opened. Close 
all your LO documents.  This will display the option showing Text 
Document, Spreadsheet, Presentation, etc..  Also it shows the Open 
option.  I just found out that if I press the Text Document option to 
open the HTML file, it does not show the HTML Source viewing option.  
Yet, if I open the same file using the Open option, instead of the 
Text Document option, I get to see the HTML Source viewing option.


So how are you opening your files?  Open Text Documents?  Or, just the 
Open option?  It does seem to make a difference in 4.1.4.2. It may 
have the same affect in 4.2.0.4.




[hopefully you are not confused by my descriptions, since it is about 
3:30 in the morning here.  Got up to see the snow storm that hit here a 
few hours ago and now predicted to be in full force.]



On 02/04/2014 10:33 PM, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/4/2014 10:06 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

No, I made sure that the HTML source item was not selected. I've 
tried a few different files generated by different sources. Generally 
they behave as I described, although I did find one that opened 
correctly.
What kind of files did you try that were generated by different 
programs?  Which ones worked?  Do all the files have the .html 
extension, or are some .xhtml, etc?  Do you know if there is a certain 
pattern in the source code of each file that causes LibreOffice to 
display the source?  When I tried loading an HTML file into 
LibreOffice 4.2, it worked correctly.  If the files do not contain any 
sensitive, personal, or otherwise information that you do not want to 
publish, you can send the list and I the HTML files you tried.  
However, *E-Mail attachments are not accepted by the LibreOffice 
mailing list server*.  If you use the mailing list via Nabble, I think 
you can upload a file to the server.  If you use an E-Mail client to 
use the mailing list, you can use something like Sendspace 
(http://www.sendspace.com/).


I have no idea what the difference is between those that work and 
those that don't.


Opening them from a blank html document makes no difference. In fact 
the title bar just says LO Writer not Writer/Web.
That isn't right!  Maybe another thing you can try is a clean install 
of LibreOffice (with all of the settings reset).  If you urgently need 
a temporary solution, and nothing works, you can download LibreOffice 
4.1.4 from: http://mirror.nexcess.net/tdf/libreoffice/stable/4.1.4/  
Just select the type you want (I don't know if you prefer the RPM or 
the Debian package).


If I start with a blank html document and use Insert-File it shows up 
as the source.


I'm using the linux version of LO. Are you using Windows or Linux?
I am using Windows Vista, and sometimes Windows 8 (mostly Vista). If 
you are able to send the HTML files (at least one that works and one 
that doesn't) to the list and I (that doesn't contain any personal 
data), I might be

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Writer printing problem

I can reproduce the printing issue of it skipping back to the first
page instead of where you started the printing at, i.e. page 5 or 6.

I am using Debian 64-bit downloaded from LO running on a Ubuntu 12.04LTS
system.
I have several printers installed - Epson Aritsan-810, Canon MG5400,
Canon MG6200, HP Officejet 7000, HP Laserjet 2300, and Cups PDF printer
[which is the default pinter]. All are network printers, not USB
connections. I use the Postscript driver option[s] if available.

I tested it by printing to the HP Laserjet 2300dn

So why do I reproduce the issue on Ubuntu 12.04LTS OS with the 64-bit
4.1.4.2 version

[build - Build ID: 0a0440ccc0227ad9829de5f46be37cfb6edcf72],
but your Debian 7.3.0 OS does not reproduce it?

That is weird. Could there be some OS variant involved here? Same DEB
version of LO but different Debian based OSs reproduce it differently?

Owen, could there be that much difference with the two Debian based OSs
to cause the different reproduction of the issue, yes on mine and no on
yours?

I run Ubuntu 12.04LTS with MATE [1.6.0] as the default desktop
environment. Which d.e. are you using for your Debian OS?

If it is OS based determination, of whether or not the issue shows up,
will be even harder to sort this issue out for a bug fix.

On 02/04/2014 10:34 PM, Owen Genat wrote:

Joe Alders wrote

After a very disappointing experience using the LibreOffice Forum at the
'ask' part of the LibreOffice site, I will try this forum for help.

This is the related AskLO thread:
http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/28581/document-in-writer-always-jumps-to-first-page-after-printing-command/

I sympathise with your plight Joe, but it is incredibly difficult to
troubleshoot printing problems as there is a lot more than just LO involved.
It is important when asking questions on AskLO to provide as much detail as
possible i.e., for a printing-related issue, the printer make/model, the
driver being used, whether the printer is local or on a network (and if
network, the protocol), the printer language (PDF or PostScript), and so on.
This helps others attempt to reproduce / narrow down the issue.

I can't reproduce the issue here under Debian v7.3.0 x86_64 using v4.1.4.2
Build ID: 0a0440ccc0227ad9829de5f46be37cfb6edcf72 when printing to a HP
LaserJet 4050TN via CUPS v1.5.3 (IPP connection) using Printer Language Type
of either PDF or PostScript (from driver). There are reports in this thread
of it working as expected for MacOS+LOv4204, WinXPSP3+LOv4142, and in the
AskLO thread for Win7x64+LOv4152, but nothing exactly matching your setup of
Win7x64+LOv4142 (and no printer details are offered by anyone). The report
in this thread of a similar issue for Ubuntu+LOv4142 does not indicate the
source of LO, but it is possibly PPA, so difficult to reconcile with
behaviour of website-sourced copies.

Best wishes, Owen.

--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Writer-printing-problem-tp4095315p4095560.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Setting language in LO Calc

2014-02-05 Thread Brian Barker


At 09:20 05/02/2014 +0100, Graham Luffrum wrote:
In Writer I can set a language for a specific document, other than 
the default LO language, so that it correctly spell-checks when I type.


It's important to realise that you can do better than this: you can 
set different languages for different parts of your document, so that 
spelling checking takes place for multiple languages.  Apart from the 
default and local character formatting, language is also a character 
style property and a paragraph style property.


I cannot see how I can do this for a spreadsheet.  To be more 
specific the LO default language is UK English, but I write a lot in 
Slovak.  So I have installed dictionaries for both UK English and 
Slovak.  When I enter Slovak text in Calc it checks it only against 
UK English.  When I use the spell checker I can change the language 
from English to Slovak, but after each word checked it reverts back 
to English.  Is there any way of stopping it from doing this.  I 
realise I can change the LO default language, but don't really want to do this.


o Changing the default language at Tools | Options... | Language 
Settings | Languages | Default languages for documents may be more 
suitable then you realise: note that there is a For the current 
document only option.  Tick that and you won't be changing the way 
future documents behave.


o You can set the language of individual cells or of a range of 
cells.  Select the cell or range (or even an entire sheet), go to 
Format | Cells... | Font | Language (or right-click Format Cells... | 
Font | Language), and set the language there.  You can even select 
part of the text within a cell and set its language separately in the same way.


o Better still, language is a property of cell styles, so you can 
create multiple cell styles for different languages and apply these 
to relevant cells.


Is there some reason why Calc is different from Writer in this 
respect in not being able to set a document language?


It's perhaps not as different as you imagine.

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] diff of 2 docx files

2014-02-05 Thread berenger . morel




Le 04.02.2014 13:49, som a écrit :
On Tuesday, 4 February 2014 3:28 PM, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org 
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:

 Hello.

Is it possible to have a diff between 2 .docx files in libreoffice?


i am not sure whether it works with docx but did you try the compare
document option under edit (Edit - Compare Document).

regards,

som


I did it. But... well, when I speak about a comparison, I also speak 
about a good way to immediately notice the differences. Take, for 
example, the command-line tool diff, or graphical meld, winmerge ( 
useful when I have to use windows... ).

Even a one char change is obvious.

I just retried it, to be sure. The changes between the 2 documents 
were... say, almost inexistent, and so minor ( and they named the 
document v2 and v3... those people just changed the version number... 
pfff... or maybe yet another error I guess. No comment. ) which is 
probably why I did not noticed them when selecting the changes the first 
time. But now at least I know how libreoffice show comparisons.
It may be the more effective for that kind of work ( working on 
formated text ) , I do not know, but I think that this dialog box is not 
very explicit*. But maybe it's only a question of habit from a 
programmer point of view, and one which likes a lot old tools like 
terminals and ncurses applications.
For example, a small text to explicitly explain what are the lines, or 
a help button, tooltips, I do not know what. But something that even 
dumb people could be able to notice. After this failure, I tried on the 
web and in the doc but was not able to find anything anew ( probably a 
bad choice of keywords ). I ended by decompressing the files to compare 
those damned xml things by hand...


But thanks for the help anyway. Problem solved.

*: in my situation, a very minor difference ( Version 2.0 became 
Version 3.0 ) in the documents, on the 1st page - so, no automatic 
move to the change which would have gave me a hint about what to take a 
look at - and using it for the 1st time made me not understanding at all 
what were those 2 lines insertion and removal.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] diff of 2 docx files

2014-02-05 Thread berenger . morel




Le 04.02.2014 20:22, e-letter a écrit :

On 04/02/2014, Peter West li...@pbw.id.au wrote:
If you write the files out as .fodt (Flat XML) files from within LO, 
you

will have straight XML files to compare.

Beyond that, you could get the tika-app.jar from the Apache Tika
project, which will let you extract plain text from the .fodt files 
and

directly from the .odt files.
On 4/02/2014 6:36 pm, berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:

Hello.

Is it possible to have a diff between 2 .docx files in libreoffice? 
Or

with any other tool, I do not really mind...


Similarly, you could use the command terminal:

libreoffice -convert-to fodt /path/to/m$file

Then apply your diff tool. In addition, you could then use xslt to
extract the elements/text of the fodt files.


Sounds like an interesting solution, I'll think about it next time 
those guys send me their junk.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] diff of 2 docx files

2014-02-05 Thread berenger . morel




Le 04.02.2014 16:55, Brian Barker a écrit :

At 09:36 04/02/2014 +0100, Morel Bérenger wrote:
Is it possible to have a diff between 2 .docx files in libreoffice? I 
am not fond of office suites, but at my work they sent me an outdated 
document describing what I have to do, and when I asked about some 
details ( or errors, in fact ) in it, they sent me a different ( but 
still with errors... ) version of the same document.


As has been suggested, try the Compare Document facility:
o Open the newer document.
o Go to Edit | Compare Document... .
o Browse to and insert the older document.

You can accept or reject the identified changes, or cancel the
dialogue if you wish merely to view them.

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker


To be honest, I did found that feature without asking here. But the 
changes were so minor* that I did not understood that this tool showed 
them, since the results were not obvious at all and the visual changes 
almost imperceptible to a user which is not used to GUIs.
Maybe one could make the hint more obvious, for example by replacing 
the selected background color by one which jumps more to eyes, or by 
showing some circles or something bigger around the change when it is 
too small? The dialog box itself could be enhanced, by being more 
explicit ( there are no bubble tooltips, no help button and no 
description text for now ).
Those are just some ideas to enhance your tool. I do not mind a lot 
about this, because I have to admit that I really do not like using 
office suites, and my activities rarely imply me to edit some of them.


Problem solved anyway, thanks to have shared some time for this.

*: at the bottom of the first page ( so, no cursor's move, and 
highlight in an area which does not jump to eyes ) the author changed a 
'2' to make it a '3' ( version change...yes...sounds a bit like new 
firefox version system :) ). Note that the quantity of changes in the 
xml files were quite impressive, the kind of dirty results which makes 
me more and more convinced that xml is over-used. And that it becomes 
even worse when Microsoft tries to use it. Can you believe that with 
that so minor change, compressed files have a delta size of 66 bytes? 
One char = 66 bytes compressed! So inefficient... but not your fault, 
ms is responsible for that.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

Five and a half years ago, I had a question, two actually, about side
notes and footnotes.

The question on footnotes was this: can footnotes be placed in two
columns when the text is in a single column?

Then side notes: Is there a workable option to have side notes rather
than (or in addition to) footnotes? A good soul by name of Andrew came
up with using fields, but it appeared to be time-consuming to add them.
There were also discussions about frames and tables, but as a non-techie
I got lost in some of the details.

In the intervening period, I thought perhaps there might have been some
progress on these questions in LO development. And maybe I've learned a
bit as well.

Thanks,
Randal

-- 
J. Randal Matheny • http://randal.us/

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment'


On 02/05/2014 02:38 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:

Il 03/02/2014 17:47, Kracked_P_P---webmaster ha scritto:

On 02/03/2014 08:48 AM, Marcello Romani wrote:

Il 03/02/2014 13:21, IOmazic ha scritto:

Hi,

is it possible that you share this tools for windows? I will need to
install
it to around 450 pc, so it will be cool to have some tool to do all
modification needed.

Kind regards,
Ivan Omazic



-
Ivan Omazic
IT Assistant / Technical Lead
ioma...@wmo.int
+41 22 730 81 55
+41 79 918 34 26
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-deployment-tp4077035p4095225.html 



Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



This might prove a useful starting point:

https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=74t=28765start=0 





Why are people still sending others to the OpenOffice.org web site for
information about LibreOffice?

For this posted need, I remember hearing about deployment of LO on a
LO web page.  Although LO was a fork of OOo from several years ago, it
is grown past those roots now.  If we do not have the needed
documentation now, we should really make it a priority to set up a web
site/page to talk about IT management deployment of LO, including
network based.

The current AOO/OOo web site should not be the place where people go to
get information about LO.  From a marketing aspect, this could lead
business users to think we are not the package to use, but AOO is.  That
is wrong way of doing business.

SO, just from the marketing aspect to businesses, this needs to be
resolved.  From the typical user, this could be an issue as well.

I stopped using OOo when LO came out.  I do not want to have to explain
to users that LO's documentation site[s] is not the place to find the
needed information to migrate/deploy LO to their systems.

Would you tell the UK tech advisors to not consider LO for the open
source option to using the mandated ODF file format requirements, but to
go with AOO/OOo since we do not have the needed documentation? We would
be saying this if we tell them to go to the OOo web site for the
deployment information.

I see too many of these postings telling users to go to the OOo site[s]
for the needed information or extension/template download.  Yes, there
may be something there that LO currently does not have, but it should
not be the first option.  LO needs to rely on LO's sites to give the
user the help and support they need.

I do not use Nabble, but I would think that there must be a forum there
about business migration and deployment.  IF not, then there should be.

Am I alone in this opinion?







Googled for a solution.
Found an interesting thread.
Thought it could be useful to the OP.
Posted it.

I don't get what all this whining is about.

Is there LO-specific information around, or some tutorial that doesn't 
involve OO? Fine, somebody is goind to come up with it (you didn't, by 
the way. Just sayin')
As an example, V Stuart Foote provided a more general solution to the 
OP problem in this same thread.




I am not whining, or hope that is not so.  I am stating the fact that 
TDF and LO are mature company and software packages.  Our support 
personnel should look for a solution withing our own web site[s] and 
not go to some other company's software package web site[s].  Yes, 
both packages has the same roots  OOo to LO and OOo to AOO, but we are 
now different packages and offer different GUI styles and options, plus 
our base coding has been changed and may not be reflected in AOO's base 
coding.


WE need to have all of the needed information to deploy LO, migrate to 
LO, and use LO, in our own web pages, wiki or not.  We should not rely 
on AOO/OOo web sites for that information.  It has been available since 
January 2011, and we have grow up along the way to be thought as a 
different package then our roots, as a fork of OOo, and different from 
AOO's fork of OOo.  We should, by now, have most of the needed 
information available on our web pages and not need to tel users to go 
to an AOO/OOo web page[s] to get that information.  Yes, it may be the 
same information, but users get confused if we keep telling them to go 
to our competion to get the information they need.  They, most likely, 
not understand the FOSS community and its sharing of code, information, 
and such.  So we need to keep our users happy with looking into our 
sites, and not others, to get the information [and help] they need with 
our office suite package.  I also would not expect users of AOO to 
expect to go to LO's pages to get their needed information.  It is not 
the normal business support practice people expect to see form 
company's support center.


To some users, having us tell our users to go to AOO/OOo web sites for 
their info, this might lead them to think/feel that LO is not a grown 
up and fully mature office suite package while AOO is.  In year one 
articles seem to state that LO was better than OOo.  Then the

Re: [libreoffice-users] Setting language in LO Calc

2014-02-05 Thread Graham Luffrum

Thanks, Brian (amongst other for making me feel like an idiot).  You are
right it is not so different, only a matter of knowing where to look.  I
was expecting to find a menu item as in Writer where I could set the
language, but on reflection the way it is in Calc is sensible.

Graham


On 5 February 2014 10:22, Brian Barker b.m.bar...@btinternet.com wrote:

 At 09:20 05/02/2014 +0100, Graham Luffrum wrote:

 In Writer I can set a language for a specific document, other than the
 default LO language, so that it correctly spell-checks when I type.


 It's important to realise that you can do better than this: you can set
 different languages for different parts of your document, so that spelling
 checking takes place for multiple languages.  Apart from the default and
 local character formatting, language is also a character style property and
 a paragraph style property.

  I cannot see how I can do this for a spreadsheet.  To be more specific
 the LO default language is UK English, but I write a lot in Slovak.  So I
 have installed dictionaries for both UK English and Slovak.  When I enter
 Slovak text in Calc it checks it only against UK English.  When I use the
 spell checker I can change the language from English to Slovak, but after
 each word checked it reverts back to English.  Is there any way of stopping
 it from doing this.  I realise I can change the LO default language, but
 don't really want to do this.


 o Changing the default language at Tools | Options... | Language Settings
 | Languages | Default languages for documents may be more suitable then you
 realise: note that there is a For the current document only option.  Tick
 that and you won't be changing the way future documents behave.

 o You can set the language of individual cells or of a range of cells.
  Select the cell or range (or even an entire sheet), go to Format |
 Cells... | Font | Language (or right-click Format Cells... | Font |
 Language), and set the language there.  You can even select part of the
 text within a cell and set its language separately in the same way.

 o Better still, language is a property of cell styles, so you can create
 multiple cell styles for different languages and apply these to relevant
 cells.

  Is there some reason why Calc is different from Writer in this respect in
 not being able to set a document language?


 It's perhaps not as different as you imagine.

 I trust this helps.

 Brian Barker


 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
 unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
 deleted



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Setting language in LO Calc

2014-02-05 Thread Brian Barker


At 11:01 05/02/2014 +0100, Graham Luffrum wrote:

Thanks, Brian (amongst other for making me feel like an idiot).


I'm not sure how you derive that reaction.  The only obvious things 
are those you happen already to know.


Brian Barker


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment'

2014-02-05 Thread Marcello Romani

For the record, I've been a happy user of soffice even before the 1.0 
release (I started being happy right after they dictched that awful 
desktop-over-desktop Start Office thing ;-)
Even before LO existed I pushed OO over MSO in the company where I work 
(I'm the IT manager). I even introduced Ubuntu Linux on the desktop 
(plus the server room is 90% debian). Ubuntu has switched to LO. I still 
haven't converted all of the windows workstations to LO, so I run a 
mixture of OO/LO instances with virtually no problems (thanks to the 
virtual absence of file format compatibility issues).


As a (again, happy) user, I'm not that passionate about the LO/OO 
competition, but I can see where you're coming from.
Though I'm not concerned about the product image as you are, you 
certainly have a point, so I'll try and be more careful in the future.


--
Marcello Romani

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Removal of non-allowed email

2014-02-05 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker


Hi,
Can someone please manually re,ove the subscription to this list of my 
other email gor...@gbpcomputing.co.uk?
I can't unsubscribe myself as the reply to the confirm unsubscribe is 
rejected.


Many thanks

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Removing Index Markers from Writer: a How-To

2014-02-05 Thread CVAlkan

Hi Peter:

Hmmm. I hadn't noticed that there was no attachment button on this forum,
as I haven't ever uploaded anything longer than a few lines.

Under the More button on the top of the message box, there is an option to
upload a file but I don't know if other users will have easy access to
that.

Maybe someone who is more familiar with this forum can advise. But, even it
it only goes to the LibreOffice folks themselves, I think that would be
useful, since perhaps they can use it is a guide for further development of
the indexing feature.

Frank



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Removing-Index-Markers-from-Writer-a-How-To-tp4094327p4095645.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Removal of non-allowed email

Hi :)
I think the unsubscribe instructions give the link to the postmaster
somewhere at the bottom of the page.

It might be getting rejected if you are not sending it from the
correct address.  I'm guessing your @gbp emails get forwarded or
pulled into your gmail one?  If so then replying from your gmail will
get rejected.  You have to reply from your @gbp


I hope 1 of those 2 routes helps!
Regards from
Tom :)





On 5 February 2014 11:29, Gordon Burgess-Parker gordonb...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,
 Can someone please manually re,ove the subscription to this list of my other
 email gor...@gbpcomputing.co.uk?
 I can't unsubscribe myself as the reply to the confirm unsubscribe is
 rejected.

 Many thanks

 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems?
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
 deleted


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Writer printing problem

2014-02-05 Thread Owen Genat

krackedpress wrote
 So why do I reproduce the issue on Ubuntu 12.04LTS OS with the 64-bit
 4.1.4.2 version [build - Build ID:
 0a0440ccc0227ad9829de5f46be37cfb6edcf72], but your Debian 7.3.0 OS does
 not reproduce it?
 
 That is weird.  Could there be some OS variant involved here? Same DEB
 version of LO but different Debian based OSs reproduce it differently?
 
 Owen, could there be that much difference with the two Debian based OSs to
 cause the different reproduction of the issue, yes on mine and no on
 yours?

Yes, this behaviour is odd, but not unheard of, even between two relatively
close flavours of GNU/Linux. There are a lot of packages in linux and it
would probably take someone more well versed in the intricacies of the
printing sub-system than I to determine what might be an influencing factor.
Under Windows it could be something as simple as not entering the user name
(to preserve cursor position), although that is a guess on my part.


krackedpress wrote
 I run Ubuntu 12.04LTS with MATE [1.6.0] as the default desktop
 environment.  Which d.e. are you using for your Debian OS?

I am currently running LXDE (as a trial) with several parts hacked out and
others grafted in (the relationship is not going well). FWIW I get the same
result under Crunchbang 11 x86_64 (basically Debian v7.x + Openbox) using
v4.2.0.4 Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71. Position
remains set at the cursor, before and after printing.

Best wishes, Owen.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Writer-printing-problem-tp4095315p4095667.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Removing Index Markers from Writer: a How-To

Hi :)
CVAlkan (=Frank) is using Nabble to view things from the mailing-list
and for posting. The 2 other ways are GMane and as just normal
emails. Of those 3 ways it's only Nabble that has a system for
uploading 'attachments'.

Follow the links in Frank's email to get to the right place in Nabble
or go through the official LibreOffice website thru Get Help and
find the correct thread by looking at the subject-lines and/or
datetime.

With scripts people have often just copypasted the code directly into
an email rather than try to upload a file. Either way around is fine.
Regards from
Tom :)

On 5 February 2014 12:12, CVAlkan fobe...@enteract.com wrote:
Hi Peter:

Hmmm. I hadn't noticed that there was no attachment button on this forum,
as I haven't ever uploaded anything longer than a few lines.

Under the More button on the top of the message box, there is an option to
upload a file but I don't know if other users will have easy access to
that.

Maybe someone who is more familiar with this forum can advise. But, even it
it only goes to the LibreOffice folks themselves, I think that would be
useful, since perhaps they can use it is a guide for further development of
the indexing feature.

Frank

--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Removing-Index-Markers-from-Writer-a-How-To-tp4094327p4095645.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

Hi :)
Sorry!  2 waggle-the-wires 'answers'.

Have you tried getting to the libreoffice splash-screen (ie with no
documents open) and then dragging the html file into the grey area
where a document would normally be showing?

Also have you tried using
File - Open
and then navigated to the html file to see if that opens it?

Regards from
Tom :)


On 5 February 2014 08:46, Kracked_P_P---webmaster
webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:

 I use 4.1.4 on Ubuntu
 I only had View / Print Layout, Web Layout when viewing an HTML file.

 Then I played around with the LO Writer and Writer/Web options, plus the
 Internet options.
 After I added the browser plug-in optional check-box, the page now had
 View/HTML_Source.
 I did not save the HTML file, since I did not want any changes to the web
 page.
 Now that HTML file opens and always shows the View HTML_source, but then
 opening a second HTML file along with the first one, afer I unchecked
 everything I thought I changed, it opens without the HTML_Source option.
 Two files opened at the same time and one has the View HTML_Source and the
 other does not.

 SO, why is one now showing that HTML source option and the other does not.
 The HTML_Source one did not originally have that option till I did some
 check-box adding.  So something changed to see the HTML source code in
 Writer for the original and not for the next one.

 YES, it is weird.

 Well, now I just opened the first file and it is no longer showing the
 HTML_Source view option.  Weirder yet.

 It might have something to do with the Field Code check-box in Writer/Web,
 and the Internet / Browser Plug-in / Display documents in browser check-box.
 Right now, I have the field code check-box checked in Writer, but not in
 Writer/Web.

 So do you have the Field Code check-boxes checked in one or both Writer/Web
 view and Writer view options, and the browser plug-in checked?

 Why you see the view source option for one file and then not for another is
 a mystery.  Was there some script tagged with the original file for a bit
 so it would show the HTML source view but not tagged with the other file.
 Then get untagged with the first one after playing around again with the
 check-boxes during the viewing of the file, so the LO shut down and then
 opening the first page again after restarting LO.

 SO, this source viewing and non source viewing of the HTML files/pages is in
 Ubuntu's 4.1.4 [64-bit] version and not just in 4.2.0.4.

 ALSO, it seems to open differently with how the page is opened. Close all
 your LO documents.  This will display the option showing Text Document,
 Spreadsheet, Presentation, etc..  Also it shows the Open option.  I just
 found out that if I press the Text Document option to open the HTML file,
 it does not show the HTML Source viewing option.  Yet, if I open the same
 file using the Open option, instead of the Text Document option, I get
 to see the HTML Source viewing option.

 So how are you opening your files?  Open Text Documents?  Or, just the
 Open option?  It does seem to make a difference in 4.1.4.2. It may have
 the same affect in 4.2.0.4.



 [hopefully you are not confused by my descriptions, since it is about 3:30
 in the morning here.  Got up to see the snow storm that hit here a few hours
 ago and now predicted to be in full force.]



 On 02/04/2014 10:33 PM, null wrote:

 Hello,
 On 2/4/2014 10:06 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

 Hi,

 No, I made sure that the HTML source item was not selected. I've tried
 a few different files generated by different sources. Generally they behave
 as I described, although I did find one that opened correctly.

 What kind of files did you try that were generated by different programs?
 Which ones worked?  Do all the files have the .html extension, or are some
 .xhtml, etc?  Do you know if there is a certain pattern in the source code
 of each file that causes LibreOffice to display the source?  When I tried
 loading an HTML file into LibreOffice 4.2, it worked correctly.  If the
 files do not contain any sensitive, personal, or otherwise information that
 you do not want to publish, you can send the list and I the HTML files you
 tried.  However, *E-Mail attachments are not accepted by the LibreOffice
 mailing list server*.  If you use the mailing list via Nabble, I think you
 can upload a file to the server.  If you use an E-Mail client to use the
 mailing list, you can use something like Sendspace
 (http://www.sendspace.com/).

 I have no idea what the difference is between those that work and those
 that don't.

 Opening them from a blank html document makes no difference. In fact the
 title bar just says LO Writer not Writer/Web.

 That isn't right!  Maybe another thing you can try is a clean install of
 LibreOffice (with all of the settings reset).  If you urgently need a
 temporary solution, and nothing works, you can download LibreOffice 4.1.4
 from: http://mirror.nexcess.net/tdf/libreoffice/stable/4.1.4/  Just select
 the type you want (I

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

Hi :)
Such attitude is dying out.

Modern devices almost entirely force people into top-posting and
almost all people new to mailing-lists will have no idea about the
possibility of doing anything other than top-posting.  Some allow
users to reconfigure their devices to bottom-post but it's beyond most
users.

Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
which office workers really do not have time for.  it might have been
a better system but we let MS dictate how we do emailing and now we
have to live with that or accept increasing unpopularity.

Hopefully this mailing list helps people learn that bottom posting is
widely used in Open Source projects and helps them become more
familiar with doing so.  Other successful gateway projects also use
top-posting a lot, for example Firefox, Ubuntu and others.  Ones that
remain unpopular or have a hard time attracting new people (such as
Evolution) insist on bottom posting and sees almost all enquirers
leave rather than become involved.  It is sad but we kinda have to
live with the way things are rather than the way we might prefer them
to be.

Sadly, Open Source is still a minority amongst new users that we are
trying to attract.  Happily many of those seem to move on to using
other open source projects.


Errr, just a minor point but if someone posts something like this
off-list then it's a bit rude to throw their post into the lime-light.
 If you feel you must do so then please remove or hide their name but
it's better to just point out to them that their view-point is
important even if it might be unpopular.

As you have probably seen many on this mailing-list constantly
disagree with each other about almost everything and anything.  It's
something that makes Open Source great imo.  We all disagree but that
leads to us offering choices and diversity
Regards from
Tom :)




On 4 February 2014 23:22, Peter West li...@pbw.id.au wrote:
 This sent to me off-list.

 No further comment required.


 On 5/02/2014 12:24 am, Anthony Baldwin wrote:

 On 2/4/2014 2:59 AM, Peter West wrote:

 Why is, do you think, that people feel the need to apologise on this
 very list for bottom-posting? Because of my ad-hominem attacks? It must
 be, because all the bottom-posters on this list are angels of
 forbearance, while all the top-posters are repeatedly admonishing
 bottom-posters to please, please, top-post.

 Fellas, look in the mirror.


 I will never apologize for proper behavior on mailing lists.

 I don't waste time correcting those who top-post.
 As Mark Twain said,
 Never try to teach a pig to whistle;
 it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

 Tony


 -- Peter West ...and a sword will pierce through your own soul also...

 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems?
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
 deleted

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

Hi :)
If it's not been done already then it might be worth posting a fresh
new bug-report about this but using the LibreOffice bug-tracker rather
than the AOO one.

LO develops far faster and code clean-up has fixed things or smoothed
things out without anyone directly focussing on some of the fixes that
have just 'magically' happened.  So, now it's difficult to know if
long-running bugs really do still exist and worth spending time on.

As i understand it there are people going through long-running bugs
but it's painfully slow and boring.  So, we need to free-up those
people by just reposting long-running bugs from OOo that we notice
still exist in LO to give them even just 1 or 2 less to run through
Quality Assurance techniques with.

Regards from
Tom :)




On 5 February 2014 09:33, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm wrote:
 Five and a half years ago, I had a question, two actually, about side
 notes and footnotes.

 The question on footnotes was this: can footnotes be placed in two
 columns when the text is in a single column?

 Then side notes: Is there a workable option to have side notes rather
 than (or in addition to) footnotes? A good soul by name of Andrew came
 up with using fields, but it appeared to be time-consuming to add them.
 There were also discussions about frames and tables, but as a non-techie
 I got lost in some of the details.

 In the intervening period, I thought perhaps there might have been some
 progress on these questions in LO development. And maybe I've learned a
 bit as well.

 Thanks,
 Randal

 --
 J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/

 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems? 
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

I think Frames would be the best answer to both problems. A Frame can
be set up to have two columns, for instance, and there is one that
would work well for side notes too I believe.

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Tom Davies tomc...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi :)
 If it's not been done already then it might be worth posting a fresh
 new bug-report about this but using the LibreOffice bug-tracker rather
 than the AOO one.

 LO develops far faster and code clean-up has fixed things or smoothed
 things out without anyone directly focussing on some of the fixes that
 have just 'magically' happened.  So, now it's difficult to know if
 long-running bugs really do still exist and worth spending time on.

 As i understand it there are people going through long-running bugs
 but it's painfully slow and boring.  So, we need to free-up those
 people by just reposting long-running bugs from OOo that we notice
 still exist in LO to give them even just 1 or 2 less to run through
 Quality Assurance techniques with.

 Regards from
 Tom :)




 On 5 February 2014 09:33, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm wrote:
 Five and a half years ago, I had a question, two actually, about side
 notes and footnotes.

 The question on footnotes was this: can footnotes be placed in two
 columns when the text is in a single column?

 Then side notes: Is there a workable option to have side notes rather
 than (or in addition to) footnotes? A good soul by name of Andrew came
 up with using fields, but it appeared to be time-consuming to add them.
 There were also discussions about frames and tables, but as a non-techie
 I got lost in some of the details.

 In the intervening period, I thought perhaps there might have been some
 progress on these questions in LO development. And maybe I've learned a
 bit as well.

 Thanks,
 Randal

 --
 J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/

 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems? 
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
 deleted

 --
 To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
 Problems? 
 http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
 Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
 List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted




-- 
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

The solution I got earlier was to insert Fields into the frames, but it
was a convoluted process that would not appear to be workable for a
large file of, say, hundreds of pages. Or would it?
-- 
J. Randal Matheny • http://randal.us/

You said / Você disse:
 I think Frames would be the best answer to both problems. A Frame can
 be set up to have two columns, for instance, and there is one that
 would work well for side notes too I believe.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2


Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting 
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top 
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the 
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01 
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML 
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the 
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to 
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want 
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its 
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug 
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to 
fix it?


Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:
I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html


Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month 
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.


Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those 
produced lately by moneydance.


I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's 
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.


The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2



I would say yes to that.
Since LO seems to be used as a web editor - i.e. LibreOffice Writer/Web 
options - we should not need to remove the DOCTYPE tag from the HTML 
files to get it to work.



On 02/05/2014 10:59 AM, null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting 
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the 
top of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, 
etc) the file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01 
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML 
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the 
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to 
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you 
want to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its 
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug 
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to 
fix it?


Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:
I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html


Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month 
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.


Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those 
produced lately by moneydance.


I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's 
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.


The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.







--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

Have you looked at creating a Page Template that contains the fields
and frames you need?

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:54 AM, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm wrote:
 The solution I got earlier was to insert Fields into the frames, but it
 was a convoluted process that would not appear to be workable for a
 large file of, say, hundreds of pages. Or would it?
 --
 J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/

 You said / Você disse:
 I think Frames would be the best answer to both problems. A Frame can
 be set up to have two columns, for instance, and there is one that
 would work well for side notes too I believe.



-- 
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

No, but would that solve the many steps required to insert data through
the Fields option? From what I gathered, each time the user would have
to go through multiple steps to insert a note. Or am I missing
something?

-- 
J. Randal Matheny • http://randal.us/

You said / Você disse:
 Have you looked at creating a Page Template that contains the fields
 and frames you need?

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Persistent System Level Custom Options?

2014-02-05 Thread Stephan Bergmann


On 02/04/2014 08:01 PM, iveand wrote:

For some of the settings, they aren't correctly seen by the user until
after we remove the user's pre-existing registrymodifications.xcu
(even if we didn't intentionally have any of those values overridden).
It is my guess that is because there are some of the keys listed in the
default generated registrymodifications.xcu that conflict -- if it was
generated BEFORE the installation of this newly created extension.


Yes, if ever a value has been written into the user's 
registrymodifications.xcu it wins over any (non-final) value from lower 
layers.  (And for some entries the writing may well have been solely at 
LO's discretion, not obviously linked to an explicit user action.)  Do 
you have an example of an entry that didn't work?


Stephan


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

Well, what I am talking about is the page layout part of this, not the
adding a footnote part. For instance, a frame that is set for two
columns would address your desire to have two columns of footnotes on
a page that otherwise was only one column. And the Marginalia frame
might address your desire for something on the side. You would still
need to insert the notes, but this would let you control where on the
page they show up.

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm wrote:
 No, but would that solve the many steps required to insert data through
 the Fields option? From what I gathered, each time the user would have
 to go through multiple steps to insert a note. Or am I missing
 something?

 --
 J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/

 You said / Você disse:
 Have you looked at creating a Page Template that contains the fields
 and frames you need?



-- 
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

Correct, I think I follow. Question is if frames would be same size on
each page.

But the process to insert the notes still would be something of a
hassle, no?

Thanks!
-- 
J. Randal Matheny • http://randal.us/

You said / Você disse:
 Well, what I am talking about is the page layout part of this, not the
 adding a footnote part. For instance, a frame that is set for two
 columns would address your desire to have two columns of footnotes on
 a page that otherwise was only one column. And the Marginalia frame
 might address your desire for something on the side. You would still
 need to insert the notes, but this would let you control where on the
 page they show up.
 
 On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm
 wrote:
  No, but would that solve the many steps required to insert data through
  the Fields option? From what I gathered, each time the user would have
  to go through multiple steps to insert a note. Or am I missing
  something?
 
  --
  J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/
 
  You said / Você disse:
  Have you looked at creating a Page Template that contains the fields
  and frames you need?
 
 
 
 -- 
 Kevin B. O'Brien
 zwiln...@gmail.com
 http://google.me/+kevinobrien
 Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment'

2014-02-05 Thread Jonathon



On February 5, 2014 1:53:59 AM PST, Kracked_P_P wrote:

both packages has the same roots  OOo to LO and OOo to AOO, but we are now 
different packages and offer different GUI styles and options, plus our base 
coding has been changed and may not be reflected in AOO's base coding.

Given the differences in the code base, can we even be sure that information 
provided on the AOO website will apply to LibO?  

I do know that there are enough differences between AOO and LibO, that it is 
easier to simply install and use both, than trying to work around the missing 
feature/function in the other one.


jonathon
-- 
Sent from the eating establishment at the far side of time, and the near side 
of space.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Persistent System Level Custom Options?

Hi :)
Wow!!! It's rare for someone to go ahead and make something like that
which many other people would also probably find useful!! Welcome in
chap!

Is there any chance of you uploading your Extension to
http://extensions.libreoffice.org/

Preferably give it an Open Source / copyleft license such as a
Creative Commons license? Then other people might be able to help
by looking over your code, suggesting and making changes and generally
helping keep it up-to-date
http://creativecommons.org/

Many thanks and regards (and congrats) from
Tom :)))

On 4 February 2014 19:01, iveand ive...@gmail.com wrote:
Stephan (and others),

Thanks again for your reply. With your help here and from the bug
report referenced earlier I have been able to successfully create an
.oxt that will set our preferred settings. As it is a shared
extension it sits between the system settings (which are overridden on
new version upgrade) and the user settings. So, a user can still
override these settings should they wish.

Sorry, my DevGuide URL was wrong, it should be
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Extensions/Extensions.

Unfortunately this seems offline today, as it is just displaying an
empty page. I got it from Google Cache, however, and with your other
example links was able to put something together. I would hope that
somehow http://extensions.libreoffice.org would link to a how to make
extensions for beginners guide, which could be the AOO docs for now as
a minimum.

For an example configuration-only extension,
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69609#c3 has a link to
http://www.linuxtag.org/2012/fileadmin/www.linuxtag.org/slides/Thorsten%20Behrens%20-%20LibreOffice%20configuration%20management%20-%20Tools_%20approaches%20and%20best%20practices.p331.pdf
which in turn has a link to
http://users.freedesktop.org/~thorsten/extensions/config_only_sample.oxt.

For anyone interested, here then is my first stab at creating an
extension which will set our required system wide defaults. It is
installed with unopkg add --shared ssg-defaults.oxt

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0WVXg1DL6duNkE2WUFZWGFETEE

For first timers (this was me until yesterday), the .oxt source can be
viewed the same as a .zip archive (can even change the extension to .zip
if you like: they are interchangeable but you want it as an .oxt in the
finished form)

For some of the settings, they aren't correctly seen by the user until
after we remove the user's pre-existing registrymodifications.xcu
(even if we didn't intentionally have any of those values overridden).
It is my guess that is because there are some of the keys listed in the
default generated registrymodifications.xcu that conflict -- if it was
generated BEFORE the installation of this newly created extension.

Thanks again,

iveand

[Btw, your reply mail looked really garbled, see above. Could it be
you're using a mail client that only produces poorly formatted plaintext
alongside an HTML alternative?]

I noticed that too, so thanks for the warning: I think it is the
thunderbird always html extension, which I have now disabled.
Unfortunate bug it seems in thunderbird which will revert things to text
only email even if they were intended as html otherwise. Another
discussion for another list, however! So, we'll see how this one turns
out, and if people can follow it clearly or not.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Side notes and footnotes

I have been doing a little Google searching, and I may have led you
down the wrong path. It may not be possible tot place footnotes within
frames in LibreOffice.

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:00 PM, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm wrote:
 Correct, I think I follow. Question is if frames would be same size on
 each page.

 But the process to insert the notes still would be something of a
 hassle, no?

 Thanks!
 --
 J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/

 You said / Você disse:
 Well, what I am talking about is the page layout part of this, not the
 adding a footnote part. For instance, a frame that is set for two
 columns would address your desire to have two columns of footnotes on
 a page that otherwise was only one column. And the Marginalia frame
 might address your desire for something on the side. You would still
 need to insert the notes, but this would let you control where on the
 page they show up.

 On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM, J. Randal Matheny ran...@fastmail.fm
 wrote:
  No, but would that solve the many steps required to insert data through
  the Fields option? From what I gathered, each time the user would have
  to go through multiple steps to insert a note. Or am I missing
  something?
 
  --
  J. Randal Matheny * http://randal.us/
 
  You said / Você disse:
  Have you looked at creating a Page Template that contains the fields
  and frames you need?



 --
 Kevin B. O'Brien
 zwiln...@gmail.com
 http://google.me/+kevinobrien
 Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.



-- 
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Robert Holtzman

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:
 Hi :)
 Such attitude is dying out.
 
 Modern devices almost entirely force people into top-posting and
 almost all people new to mailing-lists will have no idea about the
 possibility of doing anything other than top-posting.  Some allow
 users to reconfigure their devices to bottom-post but it's beyond most
 users.

That doesn't mean they can't/shouldn't learn.

 
 Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
 which office workers really do not have time for.  it might have been
 a better system but we let MS dictate how we do emailing and now we
 have to live with that or accept increasing unpopularity.

I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.

 
 Hopefully this mailing list helps people learn that bottom posting is
 widely used in Open Source projects and helps them become more
 familiar with doing so.  Other successful gateway projects also use
 top-posting a lot, for example Firefox, Ubuntu and others.  Ones that
 remain unpopular or have a hard time attracting new people (such as
 Evolution) insist on bottom posting and sees almost all enquirers
 leave rather than become involved.  It is sad but we kinda have to
 live with the way things are rather than the way we might prefer them
 to be.

That outlook would mean that we (US) would still be under British rule.

Tell it to any country that has overthrown an autocratic ruler. 

 ...snip...

There is a special spot in hell for people who overquote *including
multiple sigs and footers*.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Your mail is being read by tight lipped 
NSA agents who fail to see humor in Doctor 
Strangelove 
Key ID 8D549279

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

2014-02-05 Thread Mark Bourne

Uploading the document to the W3C validator (http://validator.w3.org/) 
it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so 
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the file to 
open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance producing 
invalid output, rather than with LO.


Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also fail, 
as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.


Mark.


null wrote:

Hello,
 It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.






--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Appearance of cell borders in Calc

2014-02-05 Thread david_lynch

 I have spreadsheets where the width of the cell borders varies and is 
important. I have about twenty different styles which I apply, by 
formula (STYLE()), to several hundred cells. The cells are square. There 
are two widths of border 0.05pt and 2.05 pt.
All is well when the magnification is 100%: both wide and narrow 
vertical bars look the same as the horizontal ones. However, if the 
magnification changes the vertical and horizontal bars diverge in 
appearance. Sometimes the wide vertical ones look the same as the narrow 
horizontal ones.
Is there anything I can do to retain consistency of appearance when 
changing magnification?


David Lynch
4.1.3.2 on Windows Vista.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2



To edit HTML files, I tend to use Kompozer, an WYSIWYG HTML editor, or 
just a plain text editor.




On 02/05/2014 02:45 PM, Mark Bourne wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator (http://validator.w3.org/) 
it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so 
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the file 
to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance 
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.


Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also fail, 
as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.


Mark.


null wrote:

Hello,
 It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.









--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2


Hello,
On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator (http://validator.w3.org/) 
it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).
Not only that; there should be a reference to 
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd at the end of the DOCTYPE section!  
The HTML DOCTYPE is messed up.


The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so 
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the file 
to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance 
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.
Unfortunately, the corrected syntax doesn't fix a thing.  I think the 
LibreOffce HTML parser might not handle DOCTYPEs correctly?  It worked 
in previous versions.  If I were to put a comment like !-- Hello world 
-- or something else into the HTML file (DOCTYPE removed), the parser 
recognizes it.  Even inserting !THISISNOTADOCTYPE works.  It is just 
when there is a DOCTYPE, even with correct syntax, that the LibreOffice 
HTML parser is tripped.


Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also fail, 
as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.



Mark.


Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com


null wrote:

Hello,
 It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.






.




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Appearance of cell borders in Calc

2014-02-05 Thread Brian Barker


At 19:52 05/02/2014 +, David Lynch wrote:
I have spreadsheets where the width of the cell borders varies and 
is important. I have about twenty different styles which I apply, by 
formula (STYLE()), to several hundred cells. The cells are square. 
There are two widths of border 0.05pt and 2.05 pt. All is well when 
the magnification is 100%: both wide and narrow vertical bars look 
the same as the horizontal ones. However, if the magnification 
changes the vertical and horizontal bars diverge in appearance. 
Sometimes the wide vertical ones look the same as the narrow horizontal ones.


The border widths are expressed in absolute terms, of course, with no 
recognition of the resolution of any output format. But when you view 
the result, whether it is on display or a printout, possible line 
widths are dictated by the actual resolution of those devices.  If 
you can see the difference between your line widths at 100%, you 
should be able to see it at any higher magnification, but if you zoom 
out to a lower magnification you will inevitable reach a point when 
any difference becomes incapable of being represented and therefore 
invisible.  This will be different for different devices, of course, 
so you may be able to discern on printed output what you cannot see 
on your display.


Is there anything I can do to retain consistency of appearance when 
changing magnification?


Yes.  Choose from:
o Don't use small magnifications.
o Use a higher resolution display.
o Select more contrasting border widths.
o Use an alternative technique for distinguishing your cells, e.g. 
background colour?


I trust this helps.

Brian Barker


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice 'deployment'

2014-02-05 Thread e-letter

On 05/02/2014, Marcello Romani mrom...@ottotecnica.com wrote:
 For the record, I've been a happy user of soffice even before the 1.0
 release (I started being happy right after they dictched that awful
 desktop-over-desktop Start Office thing ;-)

I miss that! :) And starmail too...

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] OOo derivatives on Android

2014-02-05 Thread James E Lang

In the FWIW category:

In the past week I have discovered AndrOpen Office which is a fork of Apache 
OpenOffice 3.4.

Though it has some significant issues, it is at present a more usable app than 
LibreOffice for Android.

I use the spreadsheet feature (Calc) of office suites about 95% but AndrOpen 
Office 1.4.x supports the full range of OOo derived tools. The UI of the app is 
a mite difficult to use on touch screen based mobile devices.

One LO feature that I miss in AndrOpen Office is its enhanced implementation of 
protected cells.

I hope this report will increase interest in the development of LO for Android. 
I am very willing to provide my thoughts regarding UI features with interested 
developers off list.

-- 
Jim


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2


Hello,
I just discovered something.  If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file is 
not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file fine 
(instead of showing the source).  However, If there is a blank line 
before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the HTML parser 
is tripped and shows the source.  So maybe LibreOffice expects the 
DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics and doesn't render 
the HTML.  But still, LibreOffice shouldn't have trouble rendering the 
file, even if the person who wrote the HTML (or the generator) didn't 
follow every strict standard.  Web browsers know how to adapt to that 
kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in LibreOffice 4.2 
if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN 
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

, and the DOCTYPE is on line 1.  Is anyone able to confirm this?
Not to mention the unclosed P (paragraph) tag in the HTML file 
(luckily that didn't seem to influence whether Writer/Web rendered the 
page correctly).


Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator (http://validator.w3.org/) 
it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so 
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the file 
to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance 
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.


Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also fail, 
as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.


Mark.


null wrote:

Hello,
 It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.






.




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

2014-02-05 Thread Keith Bates


Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document, from 
file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.


Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different results my 
version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID: 420m0(Build:4)


Keith

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something.  If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file is 
not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file fine 
(instead of showing the source).  However, If there is a blank line 
before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the HTML 
parser is tripped and shows the source.  So maybe LibreOffice expects 
the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics and doesn't 
render the HTML.  But still, LibreOffice shouldn't have trouble 
rendering the file, even if the person who wrote the HTML (or the 
generator) didn't follow every strict standard.  Web browsers know how 
to adapt to that kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in LibreOffice 
4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN 
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

, and the DOCTYPE is on line 1.  Is anyone able to confirm this?
Not to mention the unclosed P (paragraph) tag in the HTML file 
(luckily that didn't seem to influence whether Writer/Web rendered the 
page correctly).


Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator 
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It 
should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so 
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the file 
to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance 
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.


Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also 
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.


Mark.


null wrote:

Hello,
 It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs.  You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc) the
file uses.  The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional.  Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem.  So, in theory, if you want
to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine.  Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.






.







--
God bless you
Keith Bates
4 Mooloobar St
Narrabri NSW
Ph 02 67924890

Jesus is the Way
the Truth and the Life


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 5:29 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.
Does this file work?:
https://doc-0g-8s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/8ka37k9nojan5h3m348ambggvqd7vnq8/139163760/12418654871184392135/*/0B-6nu1NEycJ0bTMwQWppVUtaZEU?h=16653014193614665626e=download
It is a revised version of the Moneydance file you sent me. It renders
fine in LibreOffice. The reason I am asking you to try so many things
is so that I can attempt to gather enough information to file a bug.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document,
from file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.

Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different results my
version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID: 420m0(Build:4)

Mine reports as:
Version: 4.2.0.4
Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something. If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file is
not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file fine
(instead of showing the source). However, If there is a blank line
before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the HTML
parser is tripped and shows the source. So maybe LibreOffice expects
the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics and doesn't
render the HTML. But still, LibreOffice shouldn't have trouble
rendering the file, even if the person who wrote the HTML (or the
generator) didn't follow every strict standard. Web browsers know
how to adapt to that kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in LibreOffice
4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

, and the DOCTYPE is on line 1. Is anyone able to confirm this?
Not to mention the unclosed P (paragraph) tag in the HTML file
(luckily that didn't seem to influence whether Writer/Web rendered
the page correctly).

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It
should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have, so
cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the
file to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.

Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.

Mark.

null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs. You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at the
top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01, etc)
the

file uses. The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional. Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem. So, in theory, if you
want

to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine. Would you like an official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to those
produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose it's
possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

2014-02-05 Thread Keith Bates

Yes!! It works!

I see that as well as the other changes relating to the DOCTYPE line
you've added a html tag.

Keith

On 06/02/14 09:56, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 5:29 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.
Does this file work?:
https://doc-0g-8s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/8ka37k9nojan5h3m348ambggvqd7vnq8/139163760/12418654871184392135/*/0B-6nu1NEycJ0bTMwQWppVUtaZEU?h=16653014193614665626e=download
It is a revised version of the Moneydance file you sent me. It
renders fine in LibreOffice. The reason I am asking you to try so
many things is so that I can attempt to gather enough information to
file a bug.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document,
from file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.

Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different results
my version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID: 420m0(Build:4)

Mine reports as:
Version: 4.2.0.4
Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something. If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file is
not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file fine
(instead of showing the source). However, If there is a blank line
before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the HTML
parser is tripped and shows the source. So maybe LibreOffice expects
the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics and
doesn't render the HTML. But still, LibreOffice shouldn't have
trouble rendering the file, even if the person who wrote the HTML
(or the generator) didn't follow every strict standard. Web
browsers know how to adapt to that kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in LibreOffice
4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It
should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have,
so cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows the
file to open as expected, it appears the problem is with moneydance
producing invalid output, rather than with LO.

Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.

Mark.

null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs. You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at
the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01,
etc) the

file uses. The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional. Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the
HTML

file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows the
file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem. So, in theory, if you
want

to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine. Would you like an official
bug

to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can try to
fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to
those

produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose
it's

possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.

--
God bless you
Keith Bates
4 Mooloobar St
Narrabri NSW
Ph 02 67924890

Jesus is the Way
the Truth and the Life

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 6:16 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Yes!! It works!

I see that as well as the other changes relating to the DOCTYPE line
you've added a html tag.
Well, actually, there was an HTML tag in the file before. You may not
have seen it because the source was crammed into one line. I think I
have enough information to file a bug!

Keith

Congrats and regards from
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:56, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 5:29 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.
Does this file work?:
https://doc-0g-8s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/8ka37k9nojan5h3m348ambggvqd7vnq8/139163760/12418654871184392135/*/0B-6nu1NEycJ0bTMwQWppVUtaZEU?h=16653014193614665626e=download
It is a revised version of the Moneydance file you sent me. It
renders fine in LibreOffice. The reason I am asking you to try so
many things is so that I can attempt to gather enough information to
file a bug.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document,
from file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.

Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different results
my version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID: 420m0(Build:4)

Mine reports as:
Version: 4.2.0.4
Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something. If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file
is not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file fine
(instead of showing the source). However, If there is a blank line
before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the HTML
parser is tripped and shows the source. So maybe LibreOffice
expects the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics
and doesn't render the HTML. But still, LibreOffice shouldn't have
trouble rendering the file, even if the person who wrote the HTML
(or the generator) didn't follow every strict standard. Web
browsers know how to adapt to that kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in
LibreOffice 4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid. It
should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have,
so cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows
the file to open as expected, it appears the problem is with
moneydance producing invalid output, rather than with LO.

Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.

Mark.

null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs. You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at
the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01,
etc) the

file uses. The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional. Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of the
HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and shows
the

file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem. So, in theory, if
you want

to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine. Would you like an
official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can
try to

fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to
those

produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I suppose
it's

possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

2014-02-05 Thread Keith Bates

On 06/02/14 10:21, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 6:16 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Yes!! It works!

Thank you for helping with this. Feel free to use the file as an example
if needed.

I hope that the devs can fix this soon,

Keith

Congrats and regards from
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:56, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 5:29 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.
Does this file work?:
https://doc-0g-8s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/8ka37k9nojan5h3m348ambggvqd7vnq8/139163760/12418654871184392135/*/0B-6nu1NEycJ0bTMwQWppVUtaZEU?h=16653014193614665626e=download
It is a revised version of the Moneydance file you sent me. It
renders fine in LibreOffice. The reason I am asking you to try so
many things is so that I can attempt to gather enough information to
file a bug.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document,
from file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.

Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different results
my version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID: 420m0(Build:4)

Mine reports as:
Version: 4.2.0.4
Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something. If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file
is not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file
fine (instead of showing the source). However, If there is a blank
line before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith uploaded), the
HTML parser is tripped and shows the source. So maybe LibreOffice
expects the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not on line 1, panics
and doesn't render the HTML. But still, LibreOffice shouldn't
have trouble rendering the file, even if the person who wrote the
HTML (or the generator) didn't follow every strict standard. Web
browsers know how to adapt to that kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in
LibreOffice 4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid.
It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I have,
so cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that allows
the file to open as expected, it appears the problem is with
moneydance producing invalid output, rather than with LO.

Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.

Mark.

null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs. You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at
the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01,
etc) the

file uses. The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional. Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of
the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and
shows the

file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem. So, in theory, if
you want

to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine. Would you like an
official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can
try to

fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last month
open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited to
those

produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely at the html source. I
suppose it's

possible that LO is now being more strict in its interpretation.

The work around in the short term might be to use Abiword.

--
God bless you
Keith Bates
4 Mooloobar St
Narrabri NSW
Ph 02 67924890

Jesus is

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Felmon Davis


On Wed, 5 Feb 2014, Robert Holtzman wrote:


On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:

Hi :)
Such attitude is dying out.

Modern devices almost entirely force people into top-posting and
almost all people new to mailing-lists will have no idea about the
possibility of doing anything other than top-posting.  Some allow
users to reconfigure their devices to bottom-post but it's beyond most
users.


That doesn't mean they can't/shouldn't learn.


I wholly concur that top-posting is a scourge and especially if the 
post is not trimmed; sometimes I just skip posts since I cannot figure 
out what in the long tail of to and fro the poster is referring and 
replying to, esp top-posted one-liners that make no sense. it's just 
not worth it.


and Tom's post here is irrelevant to the issue why one _should_ 
bottom-post, trim and put comments in-line but he provides valuable 
understanding of the forces against the practice.


I don't see that we all will come to agreement so that cannot be the 
point of these discussions. I think we could give them some point if 
the one side would provide a succinct summary of what it considers 
good reasons for top-, and the other side provides good reasons for 
bottom-posting.


at least that would or can shed light on the issues and lessen the 
heat. maybe.


people will make their own judgments, some will change their 
practices, most won't of course but we'll (or may) get beyond tossing 
salad or shotputs or whatever.


we could write a page somewhere and give a link to it whenever the 
topic a-flames again.


(I'm stopping here; maybe this is middle-posting?)

F.


Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
which office workers really do not have time for.  it might have been
a better system but we let MS dictate how we do emailing and now we
have to live with that or accept increasing unpopularity.


I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.



Hopefully this mailing list helps people learn that bottom posting is
widely used in Open Source projects and helps them become more
familiar with doing so.  Other successful gateway projects also use
top-posting a lot, for example Firefox, Ubuntu and others.  Ones that
remain unpopular or have a hard time attracting new people (such as
Evolution) insist on bottom posting and sees almost all enquirers
leave rather than become involved.  It is sad but we kinda have to
live with the way things are rather than the way we might prefer them
to be.


That outlook would mean that we (US) would still be under British rule.

Tell it to any country that has overthrown an autocratic ruler.

...snip...

There is a special spot in hell for people who overquote *including
multiple sigs and footers*.




--
Felmon Davis

It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion
that makes horse-races.
-- Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Peter West


On 6/02/2014 5:31 am, Robert Holtzman wrote:

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:


Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
which office workers really do not have time for.


Trimming is a sensible thing to do, whichever way you post.  It's work 
for the poster, not the reader, and top-posting is a benefit for the 
reader, not (primarily) the poster.

.


I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.


But doesn't trimming undermine the argument?  How can the discussion be 
read sequentially when bits of it have been deleted?


--
Peter West
For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or 
forfeits himself?


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread anne-ology

   Well said, Peter.

From: Peter West li...@pbw.id.au
Date: Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?
To: users@global.libreoffice.org

On 6/02/2014 5:31 am, Robert Holtzman wrote:

 On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:

 Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
 which office workers really do not have time for.

Trimming is a sensible thing to do, whichever way you post.  It's work for
the poster, not the reader, and top-posting is a benefit for the reader,
not (primarily) the poster.
.

 I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
 a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.

But doesn't trimming undermine the argument?  How can the discussion be
read sequentially when bits of it have been deleted?

-- 
Peter West
For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or
forfeits himself?

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Felmon Davis


And a good job of trimming the post too!

I wonder, does top-posting promote sequential reading of the argument?

alright; just having fun now. this is losing all point. winter is 
getting to us.


F.

On Wed, 5 Feb 2014, anne-ology wrote:


  Well said, Peter.



From: Peter West li...@pbw.id.au
Date: Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?
To: users@global.libreoffice.org


On 6/02/2014 5:31 am, Robert Holtzman wrote:

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:




Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
which office workers really do not have time for.




Trimming is a sensible thing to do, whichever way you post.  It's work for
the poster, not the reader, and top-posting is a benefit for the reader,
not (primarily) the poster.
.



I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.



But doesn't trimming undermine the argument?  How can the discussion be
read sequentially when bits of it have been deleted?




--
Felmon Davis

You will experience a strong urge to do good; but it will pass.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Jonathon



On February 5, 2014 3:40:08 PM PST, Peter West  wrote:

That simply demonstrates that  it is not beneficial to either the writer, nor 
the reader.

On 6/02/2014 5:31 am, Robert Holtzman wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:

 Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and
such
 which office workers really do not have time for.

Trimming is a sensible thing to do, whichever way you post.  It's work 
for the poster, not the reader, and top-posting is a benefit for the 
reader, not (primarily) the poster.
.

 I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever
see
 a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.

But doesn't trimming undermine the argument?  How can the discussion be

read sequentially when bits of it have been deleted?

-- 
Peter West
For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or

forfeits himself?

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and canno
deleted


-- 

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Importing HTML in LO 4.2

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 6:26 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

On 06/02/14 10:21, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 6:16 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Yes!! It works!

I see that as well as the other changes relating to the DOCTYPE line
you've added a html tag.
Well, actually, there was an HTML tag in the file before. You may
not have seen it because the source was crammed into one line. I
think I have enough information to file a bug!

Thank you for helping with this. Feel free to use the file as an
example if needed.
Here is the official bug report:
https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=74595

I hope that the devs can fix this soon,
Thanks for reporting the issue. Now that it has been reported, it might
be fixed.

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

Keith

Congrats and regards from
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:56, null wrote:

Hello,
On 2/5/2014 5:29 PM, Keith Bates wrote:

Hi,

I've just tried all of those changes and none of them work.
Does this file work?:
https://doc-0g-8s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/8ka37k9nojan5h3m348ambggvqd7vnq8/139163760/12418654871184392135/*/0B-6nu1NEycJ0bTMwQWppVUtaZEU?h=16653014193614665626e=download
It is a revised version of the Moneydance file you sent me. It
renders fine in LibreOffice. The reason I am asking you to try so
many things is so that I can attempt to gather enough information
to file a bug.

Additionally, I've tried opening from a blank Writer/Web document,
from file manager, from the opening screen- all with the same result.

Just for reference, as we seem to be getting very different
results my version of LO reports as Version: 4.2.0.4 Build ID:
420m0(Build:4)

Mine reports as:
Version: 4.2.0.4
Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71

Keith

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 06/02/14 09:07, null wrote:

Hello,
I just discovered something. If the DOCTYPE of the HTML file
is not the topmost line (line 1), LibreOffice renders the file
fine (instead of showing the source). However, If there is a
blank line before the DOCTYPE (like the HTML file Keith
uploaded), the HTML parser is tripped and shows the source. So
maybe LibreOffice expects the DOCTYPE to be on line 1, and if not
on line 1, panics and doesn't render the HTML. But still,
LibreOffice shouldn't have trouble rendering the file, even if
the person who wrote the HTML (or the generator) didn't follow
every strict standard. Web browsers know how to adapt to that
kind of stuff.
So, the file that Keith uploaded renders successfully in
LibreOffice 4.2 if the !DOCTYPE ... syntax is corrected to:
!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-html40-19980424/loose.dtd;

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 2:45 PM, libreoffice-ml.mbou...@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Uploading the document to the W3C validator
(http://validator.w3.org/) it appears the DOCTYPE is not valid.
It should be:

-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN
(the file is missing //EN from the end).

The original document doesn't fail with the version of LO I
have, so cannot check, but try correcting the DOCTYPE. If that
allows the file to open as expected, it appears the problem is
with moneydance producing invalid output, rather than with LO.

Arbitrarily changing the DOCTYPE to indicate HTML5 may well also
fail, as the rest of the document is not valid HTML5.

Mark.

null wrote:

Hello,
It looks like the problem is with LibreOffice interpreting
DOCTYPEs. You see, every HTML is supposed to have a DOCTYPE at
the top
of the file, explaining what version of HTML (HTML5, HTML4.01,
etc) the

file uses. The file you uploaded has a DOCTYPE of HTML4.01
Transitional. Anyway, if I remove the !DOCTYPE ... part of
the HTML
file, and reopen it in LibreOffice, it works just fine, and
shows the

file's contents (not the source). Even switching the DOCTYPE to
!DOCTYPE html (HTML5) causes the problem. So, in theory, if
you want

to view an HTML file in LibreOffice 4.2, you have to remove its
!DOCTYPE ..., and it will work fine. Would you like an
official bug
to be filed so that the developers know of the problem and can
try to

fix it?

Regards,
xmlhttprequest.o...@gmail.com

On 2/5/2014 12:05 AM, Keith Bates wrote:

I've produced a document that doesn't work with LO. It is at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbylcso4r2qm2r2/test.html

Strangely it does open in Abiword.

Earlier documents produced by moneydance as recently as last
month

open fine in LO. I have not upgraded moneydance in that time.

Having quickly opened about 20 html's the problem is limited
to those

produced lately by moneydance.

I haven't had time to look closely

[libreoffice-users] Truce

2014-02-05 Thread Peter West

I'll never proselytise for top posting if you never proselytise for 
bottom-posting.


When I see someone hinting, suggesting, urging or just plain bullying a 
top-poster to reform his or her bad habits, I'll buy in. And of course, 
you can do the same thing if the shoe is on the other foot.


Can we just let posters do their own thing?

--
Peter West
For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or 
forfeits himself?


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Connect Base to External HSQLDB

2014-02-05 Thread Mark LaPierre

Hey all,

I have HSQLDB installed here:
/home/database/back/hsqldb/lib/hsqldb.jar

I want the Base front end here:
/home/database/recipe/recipe.odb

On the LibreOffice Database Wizard:
1. Select Database
I select the radio button: [Connect to an existing database]
I select [JDBC] in the section box and then click [Next]

2. Set up JDBC connection
I fill in [data source URL]:  jdbc:[../back/hsqldb/lib/hsqldb.jar]

What do I put in the [JDBC driver class] box?

The HSQLDB documentation suggests that there is a JDBC driver in the
hsqldb.jar file but that doesn't work.

I assume that the HSQLDB package contains a driver.jar somewhere.  What
should I put in for the JDBC driver class path?

-- 
_
   °v°
  /(_)\
   ^ ^  Mark LaPierre
Registered Linux user No #267004
https://linuxcounter.net/


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?

2014-02-05 Thread Robert Holtzman

On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 09:40:08AM +1000, Peter West wrote:
 On 6/02/2014 5:31 am, Robert Holtzman wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, Tom Davies wrote:
 
 Bottom posting requires a ton of extra work such as trimming and such
 which office workers really do not have time for.
 
 Trimming is a sensible thing to do, whichever way you post.  It's
 work for the poster, not the reader, and top-posting is a benefit
 for the reader, not (primarily) the poster.
 .
 
 I really hope you don't mean that trimming is a waste of time. Ever see
 a reply to a digest message that quoted the whole digest. What fun.
 
 But doesn't trimming undermine the argument?  How can the discussion
 be read sequentially when bits of it have been deleted?

The idea is to leave the part of the quoted text you're replying to and
yes, the discussion can still be read sequentially.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Your mail is being read by tight lipped 
NSA agents who fail to see humor in Doctor 
Strangelove 
Key ID 8D549279

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Connect Base to External HSQLDB

2014-02-05 Thread Jean-Francois Nifenecker

Le 06/02/2014 05:50, Mark LaPierre a écrit :
 Hey all,
 
 I have HSQLDB installed here:
 /home/database/back/hsqldb/lib/hsqldb.jar
 
 I want the Base front end here:
 /home/database/recipe/recipe.odb
 
 On the LibreOffice Database Wizard:
 1. Select Database
   I select the radio button: [Connect to an existing database]
   I select [JDBC] in the section box and then click [Next]
 
 2. Set up JDBC connection
   I fill in [data source URL]:  jdbc:[../back/hsqldb/lib/hsqldb.jar]
 
   What do I put in the [JDBC driver class] box?
 
 The HSQLDB documentation suggests that there is a JDBC driver in the
 hsqldb.jar file but that doesn't work.
 
 I assume that the HSQLDB package contains a driver.jar somewhere.  What
 should I put in for the JDBC driver class path?
 

(some terms below freely translated from my FR environment)

-- data source (URL)
hsqldb:file:path to the
.odb;default_schema=true;shutdown=true;hsqldb.default_table_type=cached;get_column_name=false

In path to the .odb above do not specify the .odb extension.
Sset the defaults above as you prefer; these work for me.

-- JDBC driver class
org.hsqldb.jdbcDriver

-- A question: did you set the class path and configuration for Java?
If not, go to Tools/Options, LibreOffice / Java.
Check that Use a Java setup is checked, then add the Java environment
setup on the PC.

Once this is set, click Class path
In the new dialog:
(1) Add an archive
Point to the hsqldb.jar on your PC (mine is C:\Program
Files\hsqldb-2.2.8.\lib)
(2) Add a file
Point to the above \lib subdir

You should be up and running.

HTH,
-- 
Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Connect Base to External HSQLDB

2014-02-05 Thread Alex Thurgood

Le 06/02/2014 06:59, Jean-Francois Nifenecker a écrit :

Hi Mark, Jean-François,

 Once this is set, click Class path
 In the new dialog:
 (1) Add an archive
 Point to the hsqldb.jar on your PC (mine is C:\Program
 Files\hsqldb-2.2.8.\lib)
 (2) Add a file
 Point to the above \lib subdir

Note that this part didn't work for me on Mac, it provokes an error in
LO's component loader or service manager (don't remember which now), or
at least, that was the case for 4.0 and 4.1.


Alex



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Truce