On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 06:38:26PM +0100, Ren? Peinl wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm sorry to bother you with this, but you seem to be the only people
reachable outside Microsoft that know about the XLS file format. I've dealt
myself a lot with the XML versions and also did some minor enhancements to
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:51:01AM +0200, Daniel Rentz wrote:
Hi,
Askanthea wrote:
I dont know if you can help but i got your email from the -to do page.
If I have a long column of variables for example numbers 1-100 in cells
a1-a100 when i try to print it comes out on 2 or 3 pages - i
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:53:12AM +0200, Niklas Nebel wrote:
But even the description of a single version's behavior is unlikely to
be 100% accurate. If OpenFormula is supposed to specify something,
something like a standard even, such a discrepancy with Excel's behavior
wouldn't
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 09:52:04PM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
But speaking in the short-term, what would that affect us with those
existing Calc functions that share the same name as Excel but behave
differently? For instance, there exists the CONVERT function that
work differently from
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:19:24PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi dev,
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 23:33:36 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/09/09/192250tid=93
Thanks for the pointer.
And for those who are interested, here is what came to my mind
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 08:33:44PM +0200, Niklas Nebel wrote:
Jody Goldberg wrote:
What is the goal of an open-formula specification ? I'd assume it is
to improve interoperability between versions and implementors of the
standard. If that is the case then there is already a standard, MS
