https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163974
Bug ID: 163974
Summary: (May be ODF-spec related) Nested Footnotes: LO reports
`Read Error` but `ODFValidator` is quite happy
Product: LibreOffice
Version: 24.8.2.1 release
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
Component: Writer
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
Created attachment 197704
--> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=197704&action=edit
lo-syntax-error-with-nested-footnote-definition.zip: Zip file that contains all
artefacts for assessing this bug report
(May be ODF-spec related) Nested Footnotes: LO reports `Read Error` but
`ODFValidator` is quite happy
Table of Contents
_________________
1. Broader Question
.. 1. A special request
2. Attachments
3. Misc. attachments for added context
1 Broader Question
==================
The broader questions are these;
- what does OpenDocumentFormat say about "nested" foonotes and how
does LO handle it. Specifically, can LO create the equivalent of
what I see in `nested-footnote-definition.pdf` (This `pdf` file is
created with `tex`)
- given the problematic `nested-footnote-definition.odt` file here, is
there a way LO can "jump over" problematic parts (and offer to
"repair" the file, that provides atleast a "deprecated"
functionality)
1.1 A special request
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I believe this "bug" is better reviewed by someone who is quite
conversant with OASIS OpenDocument spec. So, I am Cc-ing Regina
Henschel <[email protected]>.
(Regina please excuse me if I am wrong in my judgment)
2 Attachments
=============
nested-footnote-definition.odt
This `ODT` file is created OUTSIDE of LO. Specifically, it is
created with `Org`-to-`ODT` exporter of `Emacs`.[1] (For added
context, `Org` is a plain text markup similar to `markdown`, and
`Org` is very popular with Emacs users.)
00-lo-format-error-for-nested-footnote-definition.png
Error reported by LO when opening above `ODT` file.
Note that the target line (= 21), and target column (= 55) of
`content.xml` effectively points to the EOF (= end of file) and
not a specific "malformed" XML line. In fact, the XML is NOT AT
ALL malformed, and is well-formed when validated against ODF's
`rng` and `rnc` files.
This error is reported with following version of LO
,----
| kjambunathan@debian-ng:~$ uname -a
| Linux debian-ng 6.11.5-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.11.5-1
(2024-10-27) x86_64 GNU/Linux
|
| kjambunathan@debian-ng:~$ dpkg -l | grep office | grep writer
| ii libreoffice-uiconfig-writer 4:24.8.2-2
all UI data ("config") for LibreOffice Writer
| ii libreoffice-writer 4:24.8.2-2
amd64 office productivity suite -- word processor
|
| Version: 24.8.2.1 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community
| Build ID: 480(Build:1)
| CPU threads: 4; OS: Linux 6.11; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3
| Locale: en-IN (en_IN); UI: en-US
| Debian package version: 4:24.8.2-2
| Calc: threaded
`----
01-odf-validator-reports-no-errors-or-warnings.png
ODF Validator reports no issues with the above `ODT` file. This
implies that the ALL component XML files including `content.xml`
are well-formed. IOW, LO reporting `syntax error` is
questionable. (LO can claim a `semantic error` but it claiming
a `syntax error` obscures what the problem is.)
02-my-diagnosis-of-lo-format-error.png
The screenshot shows the `Emacs` editor. Focus on the right
window which displays the below XML snippet. Note the XML tree
goes like
`text:note`-> `text:note-body` -> `text:note` ->
`text:note-body`
The "nested-ness" of the "text:note-body"-s confuses LO.
,----
| <text:p text:style-name="Text_20_body">Sunt sed ullamco amet, velit
| nulla anim dolore officia reprehenderit occaecat adipiscing magna
| elit.
| <text:span text:style-name="OrgSuperscript">
| <text:note text:id="fn1"
| text:note-class="footnote">
| <text:note-citation>1</text:note-citation>
| <text:note-body>
| <text:p text:style-name="Footnote">Laboris nulla lorem ea
tempor
| anim do sunt dolor occaecat voluptate aliqua commodo ut.
| <text:span text:style-name="OrgSuperscript">
| <text:note text:id="fn2"
| text:note-class="footnote">
| <text:note-citation>2</text:note-citation>
| <text:note-body>
| <text:p text:style-name="Footnote">Ipsum deserunt duis
aliqua
| laboris est ullamco veniam, minim. Voluptate proident,
aute tempor
| ut ad fugiat laboris sit eiusmod nostrud duis proident,
ex
| pariatur. Ad fugiat nostrud ex incididunt proident, minim
do.
| Officia pariatur et enim cillum esse ad adipiscing eu
labore velit
| esse laborum eu nisi.</text:p>
| </text:note-body>
| </text:note>
| </text:span></text:p>
| </text:note-body>
| </text:note>
| </text:span></text:p>
`----
3 Misc. attachments for added context
=====================================
nested-footnote-definition.org
This is the plain-text version of
`nested-footnote-definition.odt`. This file is in Emacs'
`Org-mode` markup format.
This file is shown in the left window of the screenshot above.
I have included this `org` file in the hope that it helps
"unravels" the XML markup.
Breadcrumb for use by the originator of the bug :: See
<https://github.com/kjambunathan/org-mode-ox-odt/issues/281#issuecomment-2489935138>
nested-footnote-definition.tex
The `tex` equivalent of the above `org` file.
nested-footnote-definition.pdf
The output I desire from LO.
Footnotes
_________
[1] <https://github.com/kjambunathan/org-mode-ox-odt>
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
