[steering-discuss] Updates on Bylaws and Federal State
Hello, here's a short update on the current status of our bylaws, and on the possible German federal states. Bylaws: Thanks to the wonderful support of our German community, we received lots of feedback with regards to the translated bylaws (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws/de). Folks, thanks a lot, this was real helpful input! We're of course happy to get more feedback, but in order to move on, only mistakes or real bad wording should be changed at this state. Statutes: We've started the progress of working on the legal statutes. These will be different from the bylaws as the legal requirements are tight. Some things missing in the bylaws have to be in the statutes, other things mentioned in the bylaws do not fit into statutes. What we will do is to work on legally acceptable statutes, that then will be enhanced by policies, so the full spirit of the bylaws is retained. As soon as we have a first draft, we will share it. One point that we need to deal with is our membership definition. We will have to be precisely on what that means, and what rights and duties membership brings. Noteworthy is also that some other rules (like definition of the ESC) should probably not be in the statutes. Federal State: We also have some feedback with regards to the ideal German federal state to found the foundation in. The following list is without taking into account where we have active people at (which IMHO is a very crucial point). - Hamburg: Very liberal state. Even the reason for the foundation (Stiftungszweck) might be slightly changed under certain circumstances. Question is, if we want to have it that liberal. - Berlin: Has some different regulations than other federal states, with some advantages and disadvantages. - Hesse: As the person in charge has changed recently, it's undetermined if things will be as liberal as they have been in the past. Worth a try. - Bavaria: Might require an independent accountant, but not sure. What should be possible is to have the foundation set up in one federal state, but have the office in another, as long as it is still in Germany. So, for example, we could set up the foundation in Berlin if this fits best to our plans, but have the office in Hesse or Bavaria, which could be more comfortable with regards to the location of active people. European Foundation: It is still unclear when and if the European foundation will be legally fixed, and how it would look like. We should take precautions so we can convert our foundation later on if desired, but details are hardly forseeable at the moment. So, this was just an update, no need to act at the moment, we're working on this. By saing me, let me tell I am only the messenger here. Thanks to the folks working on this in the background, you do a tremendous job! Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
Hi again, Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about this. I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as competition and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo, shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational decision based on their own needs. That's all for now. Thanks for reading! Sam from LibreOfficeForum.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
On 26 April 2011 22:48, e-letter inp...@gmail.com wrote: I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does not adapt it will become obsolete. Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other electronic format) editor? Its already a sort of XML editor :-) I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url when activated via the command terminal There are a number of reasons why this is clumsy. Ok, its a work around but its not an elegant solution. Most people produce most of these documents simply because they are locked into a desktop applications mentality and don't think about what the purpose of the document really is. This isn't going to change over night but we are clearly in a transition from desktop being king to at least desktop a lot less important. IMHO, LO needs to be looking several years ahead because we know how long development can take. . -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:13, sb73...@libreofficeforum.org wrote: Hi again, Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about this. I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as competition and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo, shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational decision based on their own needs. That's all for now. Thanks for reading! Sam from LibreOfficeForum.org Well, there is a Competitive Ad Filterhttp://www.google.com/adsense/support/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=21593for Google Ads, so that's not an excuse. It sould be just silly if there was no possibility to filter competitors. And just to clarify, MS Office is still the defacto standard, and The Document Foundation Community and LibreOffice community want to change that. Do you really think you help the cause by advertising MS Office? Your moral arguments are just not realistic, we all live in the real world, and competition exists!! Cheers! Jaime -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Desktop Summit
The TDF people are understandably busy with organisational tasks, nonetheless, it is a bit surprising that there seem to be no plans for a LO presence in Berlin this August at the GNOME-KDE fest. Could we not, at least, have recommendations for a couple of hotels we might congregate at and a bar where we could push a few tables together and hang a nice green LibreOffice banner? Doug Bash -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Desktop Summit
Hi Doug, Doug Bash wrote on 2011-04-27 13.17: The TDF people are understandably busy with organisational tasks, nonetheless, it is a bit surprising that there seem to be no plans for a LO presence in Berlin this August at the GNOME-KDE fest. Could we not, at least, have recommendations for a couple of hotels we might congregate at and a bar where we could push a few tables together and hang a nice green LibreOffice banner? thanks for the reminder. I forwarded it to our German mailing lists, we have a few people in Berlin. :) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
snip I use LibO for writing, and produce ebooks from the output. There are many ebook formats, as has already been pointed out by others, the main two being mobi (Kindle) and epub (almost every other e-reader). I am active in a forum on ebooks, called mobileread.com. I think I can say that the majority of writers there use one of two methods for creating ebooks. Either they use a service called Smashwords, which takes MS Word documents and produces about six different kinds of ebooks, including pdf, txt, rtf, which most people don't count as ebook formats. Or they use a program called Calibre, which has its support forum on mobileread.com, and which takes odt files as its preferred input. These two methods I would call the professional approach. On the other hand, someone interested in converting some of their documents to ebook (read epub) format for storage and use on their e-reader can make use of an extension which has been available for some time for OOo. I can't remember how good this is, since it's a long time since I used it, but I think it produces acceptable quality for what we can call the non-professional approach. My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well. Production of epub documents is a marginal requirement, which does not need to be addressed with a built-in function. Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals are adequately served by the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now several btw. So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into LibO Writer. Just my 2c //James -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 8:13 AM, sb73...@libreofficeforum.org wrote: Hi again, Thanks to everyone who has expressed a balanced, objective opinion about this. I don't want to spend a lot time here arguing about ads. I understand that it's a sensitive subject, I'm sorry that some people disagree, and I respect their opinions. But I would like to mention that I don't really have any control over the ad content, that is determined by Google. That being said, It seems rather strange to refer to Microsoft Office as competition and to show such a level of contempt toward it. I personally do not own, use, or even like Microsoft Office. But it isn't a taboo, shady, spammy, startup job. Like it or not, it's the industry standard still, and will continue to be so for a long time. Irrational hatred and attempts to obliterate all references to Microsoft or any other commercial project are counterproductive and don't seem to agree with the free spirit around LibreOffice. I have made a conscientious, informed, intelligent decision to use LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office, and no amount of forum ads will sway me. I would hope and expect that most other users of the forum will likewise have the presence of mind to make a rational decision based on their own needs. How about the issue that I mentioned earlier? At http://www.sitedossier.com/ip/174.121.218.38 it shows that there are 858 websites hosted at the same dedicated server as LibreOfficeForum.org. Examples include: http://www.1dayacuvuemoistreviews.com/ Ad website for Acuvue products (contact lenses) http://1dayacuvuereviews.com(ditto) http://www.acuvueadvanceforastigmatismreviews.com/ http://www.acuvueadvancereviews.com/ http://www.acuvuebifocalreviews.com/ http://www.acuvuecontactlensreviews.com/ http://www.acuvueoasysforastigmatismreviews.com/ http://www.acuvueoasysforpresbyopiareviews.com/ http://www.1luv2ya.com/(I have no idea what this is about) http://proxyblind.org/ (Free Anonymous Proxy) http://www.chinatradestudy.com/ (Unnamed website carrying Reuters stories) http://carsbuysell.ca/ (Classified ads, almost empty website) http://www.awm-search-engine-optimization.co.uk/ (redirects to SEO website) And LibreOfficeForum.org is at No 238 in the list. Apart from the ads that you have on LibreOfficeForum.org you also benefit from the increase in the ranking by Google for all the websites, due to hosting LibreOfficeForum.org. What's the business plan in running the dedicated server at 174.121.218.38 and how does LibreOfficeForum.org fit to all these? It makes it quite uncomfortable to host a free and open-source project on an ad-supported platform. With what I currently know, I would opt for no association to LibreOfficeForum.org. Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Next IRC QA session
Hi all, I'm adding the dev list in cc but only for information, please follow the discussion on the tdf-discuss@list. I would like to organize a new IRC QA session during the RC period. The last one, hum, was a bit empty, but we won't resign ;) So I think we (I) should dedicate a bit more organization and dedication to it. What I would like to organize first is the presence of the mentors during the whole period, we should have somebody available and really on line during a dedicated period of time, even making some noise on the channel (dancing with the bot is an option, yes :) to make sure newcomers won't go away by lack of activity. So some questions: - what would be the best period (imho the Friday and Saturday is still a good idea)? - who would be available and when (on the 2 days, we will see the exact date later) ? - who would like to prepare a presentation of the different QA tasks (mostly BZ, but speaking a bit of the tests would be good too). We will fix a date and time to play it twice, once for each main time zone. Don't hesitate to make any comment or suggestion, even if it's new for you, this will help us to polish the organization. Thanks in advance Kind regards Sophie -- Founding member of The Document Foundation -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well. Production of epub documents is a marginal requirement I'm sure that is what MSFT thought about Windows in relation to cell phones and tablets ;-) , which does not need to be addressed with a built-in function. Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals are adequately served by the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now several btw. So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into LibO Writer.Just my 2c I don't think that was a specific proposal at this point, just that the entire LO proposition could become marginalised by mobile technologies and e-publishing in a relatively short space of time. //James -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
On Apr 26, 2011, at 18:57 , David Nelson wrote: Hi Sam, I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by Charles Schulz. Sorry about that. Personally, I have no issues with your site. I think Drew is willing to debate the matter. Maybe a solution could be found? Would removing the advertising be a possibility? Anyway, just to keep you informed... I don't know whether I've missed something coming to this thread late, but is there an explanation of why they requested that the link be removed? //James -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 17:55 +0200, James Wilde wrote: On Apr 26, 2011, at 18:57 , David Nelson wrote: Hi Sam, I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by Charles Schulz. Sorry about that. Personally, I have no issues with your site. I think Drew is willing to debate the matter. Maybe a solution could be found? Would removing the advertising be a possibility? Anyway, just to keep you informed... I don't know whether I've missed something coming to this thread late, but is there an explanation of why they requested that the link be removed? Hi James, That would best come from me perhaps. The reason is actually rather simple - during this discussion it was apparent that a number of people where strongly opposed to linking directly to that forum. I do not think anyone would say that any type of agreement let alone consensus had been reached. while this was going one of the people with edit rights to the main web pages added links to the site, without I believe realizing that this was being discussed still. My asking that person to remove the link should be construed as meaning that the action was not appropriate at this time. Beyond that I would like to make a few comments more directly to a few points raised, but they would be best added to the emails in which they were raised and I will do so as time permits during the day. I hope that answers your question on the specific point. Best wishes, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] numbering in contents but not document
Hi, is there a way to have a heading that is numbered in the table of contents but is not numbered in the document? So, for instance, the Table of Contents shows 1. Introduction, but the body of the document shows just Introduction? -Todd -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
Dear good gods alive no! :eave the HTML to proper HTML IDE tools like Eclipse and don't try to be everything in one package. On 26/04/2011 22:48, e-letter wrote: I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does not adapt it will become obsolete. Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other electronic format) editor? I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url when activated via the command terminal -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 28/04/11 12:40 AM, Simos Xenitellis wrote: How about the issue that I mentioned earlier? At http://www.sitedossier.com/ip/174.121.218.38 it shows that there are 858 websites hosted at the same dedicated server as LibreOfficeForum.org. *Sigh* bash-3.2$ dig -x 174.121.218.38 ; DiG 9.4.3-P3 -x 174.121.218.38 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 51994 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;38.218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR ;; ANSWER SECTION: 38.218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN PTR 26.da.79ae.static.theplanet.com. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: 218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN NS ns2.theplanet.com. 218.121.174.in-addr.arpa. 43154 IN NS ns1.theplanet.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns1.theplanet.com. 3069IN A 207.218.247.135 ns2.theplanet.com. 39823 IN A 207.218.223.162 ;; Query time: 32 msec ;; SERVER: 192.231.203.132#53(192.231.203.132) ;; WHEN: Thu Apr 28 09:35:03 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 158 bash-3.2$ Oh, gosh, what a surprise a free forum hosted on a shared hosting platform using virtual hosting/domains. If you want that site to have a dedicated IP, perhaps you should speak to the domain owner about funding a move to a VPS or colocated box. Regards, Ben -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEAREKAAYFAk24qXoACgkQNxrFv6BK4xPjVgCePAdTJaZF6rJBsyfUO1HA4MG8 B7MAnRhOSI/0BBcB1V2kYyPreWU8dt/6 =k9Z5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums... again
On 04/26/2011 09:57 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Sam, I regretfully have to inform you that I had to remove the link to the LibreOfficeForum.org site at the request of Drew Jensen seconded by Charles Schulz. +1 I appreciate the effort Sam has made to create libreofficeforum.org. Like Sam, I feel that the general user community prefers forums to mailing lists, and that a well-implemented forum can really help grow the libreoffice community and provide a sense that the project is well-supported. I also firmly believe that having an easy and recognizable URL is important -- oooforum won't work in the long-term. Unfortunately, Sam made several poor choices in setting up libreofficeforum.org. First, he apparently didn't discuss with the community at large (on the mailing lists) or the steering committee about what would make a good forum -- he just announced to the mailing list, in the first week of Oct. 2010, that he had created libreofficeforum.org. It was set up the way he set it up, and that was that. Several what the...? comments were made at the time, especially since the site had several flaws. People have complained about the ads from day 1. People have complained about MSO being advertised. People have also said that they will not provide support on this site because of this. As for me, well, I agree with these complaints 100%. This is like selling candy to raise money for a tooth-decay foundation. It makes no sense, and it creates a mixed-up message where the message should be very clear. Sam said he needs to have ads, and he doesn't want to discuss the issue of ads here. I'm sorry, but that is the major problem with the site. That issue needs to be hashed out, if not here, by the Steering Committee. If the site needs to have ads, then we don't need the site, IMHO. I'd much rather live with http://www.oooforum.org and http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum in the short-term. In any case, I think we oughtn't link to libreofficeforum.org from the official LibO site until we either reach consensus here on the mailing list, or the Steering Committee has come to a decision. Jon -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] numbering in contents but not document
Todd, Am 27.04.2011 19:33, schrieb todd rme: Hi, is there a way to have a heading that is numbered in the table of contents but is not numbered in the document? So, for instance, the Table of Contents shows 1. Introduction, but the body of the document shows just Introduction? it's better to ask such questions at the users-list (see http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/); there you'll get help. This discuss list is more for general discussions about LibO. regards Irmhild -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
