I am not filter/format expert and I just did some tests as below: (1) In AOO, insert a page break from menu "Insert->Manual Break->Page Break". (2) Change the Breaks properties for a paragraph from right-click menu "Paragraph...->Text Flow->Breaks" and enable the checkbox for "Insert" option (3) Save the document as a ".odt" file. Check the raw content.xml in the .odt file. We can found both of the operations will set the paragraph to a style with fo:break-before="page" properties. So the two operations have same result in AOO.
But if I create a similar document in MS Word 2010 as below (1) Insert a page break from ribbon bar "Page Layout->Breaks->Page" (2) Change the Breaks properties for a paragraph from right-click menu "Paragraph...->Line and Page Breaks->Pagination" and enable the checkbox for "Page Break Bofore" option (3) Save the document as a ".rtf" file Check the raw content in the .rtf file. We can found the first operation will create a "\page" control word and the second operation will create a "\pagebb" operation. So I think the root cause of the issue is that in AOO there is only one type of page break although there are different UI entry for it. But in RTF there are two type of page breaks. I don't know exactly the difference between \page and \pagebb. But seems AOO's "fo:break-before" is more similar as "\pagebb". Both of them is a property of a paragraph style. 2012/7/11 Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]> > On 7/11/12 12:57 AM, Regina Henschel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have looked at the issue > > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120173 but cannot decide > > whether it is something AOO should change. > > > > The problem: In OOo3.3 page breaks are exported as special character > > \page. In AOO 3.4 page breaks are exported as paragraph formatting > > property \pagebb. > > > > The reporter says, that the Sony E-Reader and the Samsung Galaxy II > > Tablet does not recognize the new way of writing page breaks. > > > > the question is more if the new way is allowed and from the RTF spec ok. > > > I have no such devices. Is it a problem with other devices too? > > > > Does someone know the reason for the change? > > no but it would be important to know and to decide if the change > can/should be reverted. If the change is fine according the RTF sepc I > see no reason to change it back. > > Hopefully some filter/format experts can help here more. > > Juergen >
