Hi Steve,
why not discuss it on the list?
Stephen Fanning schrieb am 14-Dec-19 um 12:41:
Hi Regina,
Many thanks for those helpful comments, many of which are clear and
agreed.
However a few things remain unclear in my mind, as follows:
1. With regards to addressing compliance with ODF 1.3, is that standard
approved yet? If not, shouldn’t we wait until it is?
It is not approved yet, but will come hopefully in 2020. It is currently
in public review. I have added it for to explain, why I think, "1.2"
should not be in the section heading.
2. I have based the set of functions to be covered, and their
categories, on those presented in the Function Wizard at v6.2.0.2. I
worry therefore that removing the Add-ins category, or sub-dividing
the Mathematical category, or changing the categorization in other
ways, could cause unnecessary confusion for users.
That is a valid reason, so keep it.
3. Multiple.Operations is not covered by the Functions Wizard and so
does not currently appear in the wiki’s list of functions. It is
well described in the Help files and the 6.2 Calc Guide. If we also
include it in this part of the wiki, which category would it be in?
The help describes use of Data > Multiple Operations. The help has no
description about using it as ordinary function. I have written an
example many years ago, for a -no longer active- German Wiki.
http://www.ooowiki.de/MehrfachOperation.html
As the categories will be parallel to the categories in the function
list in the UI, I would add a category "Functions not contained in the
function list".
4. I had envisaged that any constraints on the arguments would appear
in the section entitled Arguments and any constraints on the result
would appear in the Returns section. With that understanding (to be
covered in a “guidelines” and “tips” page for authors) is an
additional section entitled Constraints really necessary?
No, that would be sufficient.
Kind regards
Regina
Regards,
Steve
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 at 23:03, Regina Henschel <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Steve,
Stephen Fanning schrieb am 13-Dec-19 um 21:11:
> All,
>
> At the last Documentation Team meeting, I agreed to initiate a
wiki-based
> description of the 500+ Calc functions. The idea is that such an
area could
> capture more technical information about a function than is
possible in the
> Help system. In addition we can provide representative use cases
for some
> functions.
>
> I have put some initial ideas together in the pages starting at
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Calc_Functions.
Obviously
> this is only partially complete and I still have a lot of work to
do
> populating the structure and the information about the functions.
However I
> would like to get some initial feedback from the team on what
I’ve done
> before taking the idea further (in case we agree on changes of
direction).
> So far I’ve only populated the details of one function, ABS.
>
> Please could any interested parties have a look at what I’ve done
and
> provide any feedback or comments? Maybe we can discuss the way
ahead at the
> next team meeting?
I would not make an own category "add-in functions". In former
times, it
was possible to not install them, and their internal handling is
different. But from a user point of view and from file format there
is
nothing special about these functions.
Please add MULTIPLE.OPERATIONS.
It has a special UI and is not listed in the function list. But it
can
be used as any other function and has nothing special in the
standard.
And the Wiki would be a good place to explain how to use it without
the
wizard.
It might be useful to make subcategories to the mathematical
functions.
You might need an additional "guideline and tips" page for authors.
And about the "ABS" example:
General:
It would be good to have a template page for the functions, which has
already all the sections.
You have set the technical term "Number" in bold. I would do the
same in
the Syntax. It might be necessary to use a letter for the parameter,
in
case the function is explained by some formula or the function has
several parameter of the same data type.
Some functions have constraints. Such section is missing.
I would name the section not "ODF v1.2 compliance" but "ODF
Standard".
It needs a line for ODF 1.2, and a line for ODF 1.3.
The reference needs the part number in addition.
For example ABS is in
Section 6.16.2, part 2, ODF 1.2
Section 6.16.2, part 4, ODF 1.3
Special for ABS:
The first example should read
=ABS(-56.7) returns 56.7
The result is not negative.
Related functions are
SIGN for the sign of a real number
IMABS for the absolute value of a complex number
Kind regards
Regina
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to:
[email protected]
<mailto:documentation%[email protected]>
Problems?
https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive:
https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
