> On 7/7/19 4:35 PM, Wols Lists wrote:
> I now possess a copy of the offending .docx document and the PDF
> version of it. (It contains 1.6MB, so it will take some time.)
> Tomorrow, I will be determining what is necessary to fix it. Rather
> than guess as to what would be required, I will find
On 08/07/19 03:04, Dan Lewis wrote:
> One thing I do know: an .odt file is based on styles. The only codes
> that are used are styles. This is obvious when looking at the
> Content.xml file in the .odt zipped file. Word Perfect has a different
> set of codes which it uses. I do not see any
On 7/7/19 4:35 PM, Wols Lists wrote:
On 07/07/19 17:06, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in the
ticket...
Which
On 07/07/19 17:06, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
> For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
> and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in the
> ticket...
>
>
> Which should be a good indication
On 07/07/19 16:42, Dennis Roczek wrote:
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
> and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in the
> ticket...
>
I notice the bug report mentions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi Tor,
On 07.07.2019 18:06, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
> For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
> and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in
>
>
> For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
> and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in the
> ticket...
>
Which should be a good indication that the request is unreasonable.
--tml
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi everybody,
For the reference: we have a bug report since 2011
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34002
and the corresponding openoffice bug report from 2002 is linked in the
ticket...
Best regards,
Dennis Roczek
On
> On 06/07/19 07:36, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Plus I'm a *text* guy. MS is very much a *visual* company (as are most
> people, actually). So the MS way of doing things is alien to me - the WP
> way of "here's a gui, this drops into the text setup behind it" is just
> *so* *easy*.
If you are really
On 06/07/2019 22:31, Ralf Quint wrote:
On 7/6/2019 1:00 PM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
You seem to hate a lot. Try to get over it.
+1
I'm a bit of a "grumpy old man", sorry ... :-)
Cheers,
Wol
___
LibreOffice mailing list
On 7/6/2019 1:00 PM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
You seem to hate a lot. Try to get over it.
+1
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
LibreOffice mailing list
You seem to hate a lot. Try to get over it.
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
On 06/07/19 07:36, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>> On 05/07/19 13:14, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>> And all I am saying is that the feature you describe sounds to me
>> NOTHING LIKE reveal codes, and personally I can't see any use for it.
>> The Word equivalent is "show formatting" which - like I said - was
>>
>>> "TL" == Tor Lillqvist writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> The issue is, what if you force to deal with docx and you run into
>> problems?
> The data structure inside a .docx has very little relationship to the
> internal data structures inside LO, so it would be extremely hard to
> display "codes" from
On 06/07/19 10:27, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
>
> The issue is, what if you force to deal with docx and you run into
> problems?
>
>
> The data structure inside a .docx has very little relationship to the
> internal data structures inside LO, so it would be extremely hard to
> display
>
>
>
> The issue is, what if you force to deal with docx and you run into
> problems?
The data structure inside a .docx has very little relationship to the
internal data structures inside LO, so it would be extremely hard to
display "codes" from the .docx in the LibreOffice UI.
What you can do
>>> "TL" == Tor Lillqvist writes:
> No. There are no "codes" to "reveal" in LibreOffice.
> If you want to use a markup format, use a markup format, in a plain text
> editor. Simple as that. LaTeX for instance.
I think you miss the point and I am saying that as long time user of
latex, (daily
No. There are no "codes" to "reveal" in LibreOffice.
If you want to use a markup format, use a markup format, in a plain text
editor. Simple as that. LaTeX for instance.
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
> On 05/07/19 13:14, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> And all I am saying is that the feature you describe sounds to me
> NOTHING LIKE reveal codes, and personally I can't see any use for it.
> The Word equivalent is "show formatting" which - like I said - was
> ignored by lusers and power users alike
> On 05/07/19 13:15, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
> I've never seen that, but I've got the linux WP8 somewhere, plus licence
> keys, so I'll have to try. I run gentoo, so it'll be a bit different,
> but ... :-)
BTW, the relevant files mentioned, you will find via
On 05/07/19 13:14, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>> On 05/07/19 09:16, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> Sorry but that completely misses the point. If it's read-only I won't
>> even bother to learn how to use it ...
>
> The point is:
>
> Since almost 10 years people are demanding such a feature and
On 05/07/19 13:15, Uwe Brauer wrote:
"Wl" == Wol's lists writes:
>
>> On 04/07/2019 11:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>> And yes, I would dearly love to have reveal codes back - so much so
>> that I am seriously considering shelling out for an up-to-date copy of
>> WordPerfect,
On 7/4/19 8:06 AM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Hi Uwe,
Uwe Brauer wrote:
Is there somebody with enough knownledge in macros to translate those
macros to LO 6.2?
Perhaps - I'd suggest you upload them somewhere (provided they are
available under an open source license) & post a link here.
Hi!
On 04.07.2019 20:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>
>
> From time to time the question pops up whether LO could support
> Wordperfects reveal code. Sometimes it is stated that this feature could
> be implemented by a macro/extension.
>
> Now I remember that long time ago such macros existed and
>>> "Wl" == Wol's lists writes:
> On 04/07/2019 11:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> And yes, I would dearly love to have reveal codes back - so much so
> that I am seriously considering shelling out for an up-to-date copy of
> WordPerfect, but sadly I suspect Corel have butchered it. WP8 was
> On 05/07/19 09:16, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Sorry but that completely misses the point. If it's read-only I won't
> even bother to learn how to use it ...
The point is:
Since almost 10 years people are demanding such a feature and nothing
happened.
All I am saying is: if a read only
On 05/07/19 09:16, Uwe Brauer wrote:
"AP" == Andrew Pitonyak writes:
>
>> So I read your response to say...
>> If it is a read only display them it is not worth the time to bother with
>> it...
>
>> That is certainly easier than trying to make it work :-)
>
> I would say, read only is a
>>> "Wl" == Wol's lists writes:
> On 04/07/2019 11:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>>
>> From time to time the question pops up whether LO could support
>> Wordperfects reveal code. Sometimes it is stated that this feature could
>> be implemented by a macro/extension.
> Bear in mind that "reveal codes"
>>> "AP" == Andrew Pitonyak writes:
> So I read your response to say...
> If it is a read only display them it is not worth the time to bother with
> it...
> That is certainly easier than trying to make it work :-)
I would say, read only is a first step and if users start to like it
then
So I read your response to say...
If it is a read only display them it is not worth the time to bother with it...
That is certainly easier than trying to make it work :-)
Sent from BlueMail
On Jul 4, 2019, 10:26 PM, at 10:26 PM, Wols Lists
wrote:
>On 05/07/19 03:15, Wol's lists wrote:
>>
On 05/07/19 03:15, Wol's lists wrote:
> On 04/07/2019 11:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>>
>> From time to time the question pops up whether LO could support
>> Wordperfects reveal code. Sometimes it is stated that this feature could
>> be implemented by a macro/extension.
>
> Bear in mind that "reveal
On 04/07/2019 11:08, Uwe Brauer wrote:
From time to time the question pops up whether LO could support
Wordperfects reveal code. Sometimes it is stated that this feature could
be implemented by a macro/extension.
Bear in mind that "reveal codes" is an EDITING window. That was what was
wrong
>>> "TB" == Thorsten Behrens writes:
> Hi Uwe,
> Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> Is there somebody with enough knownledge in macros to translate those
>> macros to LO 6.2?
>>
> Perhaps - I'd suggest you upload them somewhere (provided they are
> available under an open source license)
Hi Uwe,
Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Is there somebody with enough knownledge in macros to translate those
> macros to LO 6.2?
>
Perhaps - I'd suggest you upload them somewhere (provided they are
available under an open source license) & post a link here.
Preferably as a bug report at
From time to time the question pops up whether LO could support
Wordperfects reveal code. Sometimes it is stated that this feature could
be implemented by a macro/extension.
Now I remember that long time ago such macros existed and using the
wayback machine I found them. They were written
35 matches
Mail list logo
