To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5930





------- Additional comments from [email protected] Mon Nov 29 13:18:52 +0000 
2010 -------
So the ODF spec needs some a new style type for the Si format. And for the
engineering there needs to be added a number:exponent-increment (or some such)
to the number:scientific-number style.

BTW, how are XLS's formats handled when they have the ###. format as per Excel's
"Engineering" format? It's in any case "wrong" the way OOo.Calc works at
present. A 0 in the custom format is supposed to mean there **HAS** to be a
digit in this spot. A # is supposed to mean, there **COULD** be a digit in this
spot.

But if your custom format is ###.00E+0 ... then absolutely ALL numbers fill ALL
3 the digits before the decimal. I.e. a value of 1 will format as 100.00E-2,
where logically it should have read 1.0E+0.

Even if you format it using ###, this is only remembered in the same session of
having the file open. If you close and re-open the file, the custom format
reverts to 000.00E+0 ... which logically is how it's formatting at the moment.
So at present it disregards the user's explicit format codes in totality -
nowhere in any of the XML files contained inside the ODS file is the custom
format code saved at all. No wonder this is such a "difficult" thing to 
accomplish.

It shows up an enormous hole in the ODF standard! Extreme difficulty in
extending styles.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to