Hi Milos, I am still investigating, but I am reasonably sure it is not your script that is the problem. I may have unintentionally mislead you by referring to "cross-references", the links in your files appear to be correct, but I am finding errors in the written text for those links which are not the fault of your script. Hazel's files show the correct typed text and other changes appear in the "Accept or Reject" dialog, but there is nothing showing up there to indicate that she actually made changes to correct the page numbers.
Thanks for the OS and version info. I have set up a VM replication of your configuration for testing. I have sent you a separate message with a link to a complete set files I downloaded from ODFAuthors on October 3rd. when Jean announced their publication. Best Regards Dave -------- Original Message -------- From: Milos Sramek <msrame...@gmail.com> To: Dave Barton <d...@tasit.net> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 13:19:22 +0200 > Hi Dave, > > meanwhile I have studied the problem a bit deeper and found out that > update of the table of contents updates the references too. > > I've also tested the script - it does not change page numbering (in fact > it cannot do that, it does not enter such tags). Normally, when removing > a large piece of text, the references are updated, so I cannot imagine a > situation when the numbering can be corrupted. Maybe a bug somewhere. > > I use Ubuntu and the LO version was probably 4.2.6. I've updated to > 4.2.7 a week ago. > > Unfortunately, some days ago I deleted the directories with the old and > manually processed WG42 files, so I do not know when this happened. > Don't you happen to have the version from October 3-rd? I would like to > understand the problem and eventually to file a bug. > best > Milos > > > > On 2014-10-23 12:17, Dave Barton wrote: >> Hi Milos, >> >> Don't be too quick to blame your script, it might not be the cause of >> the issue I have encountered. I copied all the files (the originals, >> yours and Hazel's corrections) over to another computer with a different >> version of Writer and now I am seeing something different. I am starting >> to think that it may have something to do with the OS and versions each >> of us are using. Let me work on this over the next couple of days and I >> will report back. > > In the meantime it would be helpful if you and Hazel >> would be kind enough to let me know details of the OS and LO version you >> are both using. >> >> Thanks for the tip about correcting page references. >> >> Regards >> Dave >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> From: Milos Sramek <msrame...@gmail.com> >> To: Dave Barton <d...@tasit.net> >> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 08:57:52 +0200 >> >>> Dear Dave, >>> >>> I am sorry to have caused problems. I've even compared the original and >>> corrected document, did not see any differences. Since LO does not >>> compare everything, this may be the reason why I did not notice. >>> >>> I do not know how did this happen. There is, however, a very simple way >>> how to correct the page references: open a file and insert arbitrary >>> page reference to heading anywhere - in that moment all incorrect >>> references change to correct values (looks to be a kind o magic). Then >>> delete the just inserted reference. So, it is not necessary to manually >>> incorporate Hazel's correction into the old files again. This would be a >>> lot of work, and my work will be lost, too. >>> >>> I can, for course, do that by myself, if you agree. >>> >>> I have to find the reason. I've been using the script for about a year, >>> but the problem started to appear only recently. >>> >>> Sorry for causing problems again >>> best regards >>> Milos >>> >>> >>> On 2014-10-22 22:05, Dave Barton wrote: >>>> Hazel Russman wrote: >>>> >>>> 8<-- snip -->8 >>>> >>>>> Nothing needs to be redone. All that is needed is to use LO's >>>>> built-in merge facility to merge the published version with the two >>>>> corrected versions. It will flag up all changes and you can decide >>>>> which ones to incorporate. >>>> It appears that we have a bigger problem. I have just started working to >>>> review/merge your corrections into the "cleaned XML" files provided by >>>> Milos and I am finding that the "cleaning" process has created many >>>> errors, especially in cross-references. >>>> Just one of numerous examples: WG4201 - In the originally published file >>>> and Hazel's revision the cross-references on Page 23 to page 24 are >>>> correct. In the "cleaned" file these cross-references erroneously point >>>> to page 26. >>>> >>>> Since I was responsible for replacing the originally published files >>>> with the "cleaned" files on the wiki and ODFAuthors, without checking >>>> for these kinds of issues first, I will: >>>> a) Revert the files I replaced to the originally published files. >>>> b) Review/merge your corrections with the originally published files. >>>> c) Publish the corrected files. >>>> >>>> I think it is more important to have accurate documentation than it is >>>> to worry about minor XML inaccuracies. >>>> >>>> Sorry to have been part of the problem while trying to be part of the >>>> solution. >>>> >>>> Dave -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: documentation+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/documentation/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
