Re: Apache and ODF
Hi, All: I am confused about the UX specifications of document representation requirement on mobile devices, that which is the most first important point should be, the different device condition adaptability of layout result? or the fidelity of the document originally recorded? For example. An ODT format text document with several pages sized as Letter, which is physically defined as 279:216 (ratio as 1.29), and user want to render it in a Kindle Fire, which supplies a 1024:600 (ratio as 1.71) screen for presenting. If we do much more care about the adaptability of representation, lots data recorded inside the file will be changed, removed or even ignored. But, if we care about the fidelity much more, we have to record all the document data inside, and rendering it on the devices dutifully. In the case, all we could do for the UX, is to give some adjustable scale. Such differences are meaning not only the pagination stuff, but also some solid data inside: thinking about a full page-width-size table for instance. Of cause, all the former document editor/viewer applications for desktop, will obey the Keep Fidelity as the very first rule. But what about the mobile device platforms? As such differences will actually lead the solution into the different direction, we maybe should make it clear before having a deeper discussion. Thanks. ZhengFan 2012/10/26 Andreas Säger ville...@t-online.de Am 25.10.2012 21:14, Rob Weir wrote: If you search for it, you will find various solutions for converting ODF to EPub. But I have not seen something that does the same for Kindle's MOBI format. -Rob Thank you. I know about the converters. The problem is that all our office documents are ODF documents. The Kindle device does not provide any access to our documents until they have been converted by some other device.
Re: Apache and ODF
To Ian: Yes, I agree with you that there shall be options for: 1. Fitful formatting way, for the READING; and 2. Uniform formatting way, for the REPRESENTATION; Thus, the solution will lead: A: The bad thing is that there shall be a series of formatting specification definitions, for Kindle, Kindle Fire, Kindle Fire II, iPad, iPad Mini, IPod touch, IPhone BLA BLA BLA B: The good thing is, such refining job indicating various device platforms, could be finished inside the AOO existing framework and formatting process, only with the external works on supplying above definitions. To Rory: In my point, now, we may need not to specify the exact target we are aimed at. For although the detailed specification of every type of popular devices we faced are different, the problems need to be clarified and solved are commonly the same type of issue, is that Adaptability and Fidelity, which is bigger. Definitely, it is an UX issue, which should let KG to be involved in; But, a given solution for the issue should be workable for all the devices (of cause maybe including annoy duplicated works, but should sharing the same working path and steps), whatever the decision will be. Ah, yes, maybe we let the new comers confused in some degree. So should we keep on going within a new thread? Or renaming the current one? Thanks. ZhengFan. 2012/10/26 Rory O'Farrell ofarr...@iol.ie On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:58:25 +0100 Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 26 October 2012 08:42, Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, All: I am confused about the UX specifications of document representation requirement on mobile devices, that which is the most first important point should be, the different device condition adaptability of layout result? or the fidelity of the document originally recorded? For example. An ODT format text document with several pages sized as Letter, which is physically defined as 279:216 (ratio as 1.29), and user want to render it in a Kindle Fire, which supplies a 1024:600 (ratio as 1.71) screen for presenting. Is it possible to have choices? Keep the original page aspect ratio an scroll (Never used a kindle so not sure if it can scroll but obviously Android on phones can!) or have a fit to aspect where the page is scaled to the kindle in AOO befor export. If one of the pre-defined page templates in AOO was the kindle page size it would be possible to reformat the pages in a document to that size just as you can change from say A4 to US letter. Probably for complex documents with graphics this would break some parts of the layout but for the sort of text only novels etc mostly used on these devices it should work well enough. This assumes you can export to epub/mobi format in any scale but I'm assuming that will be similar to export to pdf. Of course the resulting document layout could be checked by viewing the epub/mobi output. Having an odf viewer for the mobile devices would be an alternative method and probably less constrained than using epub formats but it is also more work to do it. OTOH a versatile odf reader for mobile devices could be very useful in helping establish odf as the open standard for all types of document. If we do much more care about the adaptability of representation, lots data recorded inside the file will be changed, removed or even ignored. But, if we care about the fidelity much more, we have to record all the document data inside, and rendering it on the devices dutifully. In the case, all we could do for the UX, is to give some adjustable scale. Such differences are meaning not only the pagination stuff, but also some solid data inside: thinking about a full page-width-size table for instance. There can be issues with documents that have both portrait and landscape pages in them on normal computer screens. Of cause, all the former document editor/viewer applications for desktop, will obey the Keep Fidelity as the very first rule. But what about the mobile device platforms? As such differences will actually lead the solution into the different direction, we maybe should make it clear before having a deeper discussion. Thanks. ZhengFan 2012/10/26 Andreas Säger ville...@t-online.de Am 25.10.2012 21:14, Rob Weir wrote: If you search for it, you will find various solutions for converting ODF to EPub. But I have not seen something that does the same for Kindle's MOBI format. -Rob Thank you. I know about the converters. The problem is that all our office documents are ODF documents. The Kindle device does not provide any access to our documents until they have been converted by some other device. In this discussion it is important to specify clearly which Kindle is the target device, as the screen ratio
Re: Open Office on IOS ?
hi Fox: Similarly, some other guy asked several days before, that whether there is an Android version openoffice. Also similarly, the answer is NO, too. For Openoffice on IOS or Android means not only the completely different implementation of all functions, but also the brandly new UX design. Of cause we Openoffice guys know the value of mobile applications, but we just do not have the golden fingers:) Personally, I think the cloudy Openoffice would be a better choice. For based on it, we need not to care about the different specifications among the popular devices. Zhengfan 在 2012/10/18 1:15 AM，Virgo Fox virgo...@icloud.com写道： *Is there a version of Open Office for iPhone or an APP ? * *Love That Virgo Fox Sent from iCloud*
Re: Open Office on IOS ?
Well, still personally, without high speed network I would prefer reading physical books, for I can hardly start my work, whatever the cloudy stuffs are being used or not. Being connected all the time, is the way that part of people are living in. Cloudy stuff serves the people who connected, as the computer stuff serves the people who plugged. Oh, Yes, we are talking about the mobility of Openoffice…But I guess there will be a big intersection between the group of guys who want to use Openoffice on the mobile devices and the group of guys who are always connected. For the people who want to use the Openoffice on the mobile devices but not be connected?…Yes we need an APP at the time. But as the people can get the APP from the APP store, I guess they just met the broken network occasionally. So, what about enjoying a book in the moment? :D 在 2012/10/19 12:20 AM，Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com写道： On 2012-10-18 8:10 AM Fan Zhengzhou wrote: Personally, I think the cloudy Openoffice would be a better choice. For based on it, we need not to care about the different specifications among the popular devices. That would be a bad choice. Users could only use OpenOffice when they had access to the internet. Also many people only have slow dial-up access. -- __**___ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - Edgard Varese
Re: I am new for Apache Open Office
Hi: Welcome to the Apache OpenOffice Commnunity! Here is the gate for enjoying the open source world! 2012/9/30 zhun guo mike5...@gmail.com Dear all, I am new for this mail list. I am from Shanghai , I major in online office interoperability and ODF. Nice to meet you ! Best Regards! Zhun Guo Shanghai Biaoma IT Co. www.mabaoo.com mike5guo(at)gmail.com mike5...@gmail.com
[Call for review] Issue about the tab stop filling character missing
Hi, Community: Here is a issue 121076 in BugZilla, some tab stop filling character missing stuff, in Writer. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121076 Now I supplied a patch for it, anyone volunteer on reviewing the codes? Thanks a lot!
[call for review] Re: svn commit: r1386590 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk: ./ main/sw/inc/ main/sw/source/core/doc/ main/sw/source/core/tox/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/dump/ main/
Hi, Pavel:
I have aleady open a issue 121066 in BugZilla, and also supplied a patch
for it.
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121066
Do you have any time on reviewing the codes? Or any other volunteers?
Thanks a lot!
2012/9/18 Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz
Hi,
On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:46 PM, o...@apache.org wrote:
+void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong nFrom,sal_uLong nTo)
+{
+std::pairCPItr,CPItr aRange = aSttCps.equal_range(nFrom);
+CPItr aItr = aRange.first;
+while (aItr != aRange.second)
+{
+if (aItr-second)
+{
+if (aItr-second-first == nFrom)
the last line is a source of compiler warning:
sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void
WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’:
sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed
and unsigned integer expressions
Can you please fix it?
--
Pavel Janík
Re: svn commit: r1386590 - in /incubator/ooo/trunk: ./ main/sw/inc/ main/sw/source/core/doc/ main/sw/source/core/tox/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/ main/sw/source/filter/ww8/dump/ main/sw/source/ui/index
Hi, Pavel:
I will try to fix it.
Thanks a lot!
2012/9/18 Pavel Janík pa...@janik.cz
Hi,
On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:46 PM, o...@apache.org wrote:
+void WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong nFrom,sal_uLong nTo)
+{
+std::pairCPItr,CPItr aRange = aSttCps.equal_range(nFrom);
+CPItr aItr = aRange.first;
+while (aItr != aRange.second)
+{
+if (aItr-second)
+{
+if (aItr-second-first == nFrom)
the last line is a source of compiler warning:
sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx: In member function ‘void
WW8_WrtBookmarks::MoveFieldMarks(sal_uLong, sal_uLong)’:
sw/source/filter/ww8/wrtww8.cxx:315: warning: comparison between signed
and unsigned integer expressions
Can you please fix it?
--
Pavel Janík
Re: [PERSONAL] My absence
Also take care of yourself please. 2012/9/7 Shenfeng Liu liush...@gmail.com Don, Best wishes to you and your family! - Simon 2012/9/7 Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com I feel it necessary to explain why I have been absent from discussions here and on ooo-private recently. My wife was stricken with a serious medical emergency Wednesday, August 29th. She is recovering after surgery, and is in an intensive care unit here in one of the top hospitals in Boston. Needless to say, my attention is not on Apache OpenOffice as much as I love this project and community. The past week has been personally very stressful and exhausting. Next week looks a whole lot better as her condition has improved dramatically and she is now on the path to recovery. Graduation is a very important goal, I will be doing what I can to help with this. I've also been actively leading the OpenOffice track development for ApacheCon EU. Oliver-Rainer Wittmann has stepped in to take over this effort over the past week. Thank you Oliver. Thanks for your understanding. The medical team is optimistic that my wife will have a full recovery, but it will be a lengthy process. In the meantime, I do plan to crank up my work engine as her care and situation have now become much more stabilized.
[Call For Review] Review the solution of i120759
Hi, Community: As the fix work of issue 120759 [From Symphony]Bookmark value changed when opening the doc file in BugZilla is already done, now I am expecting any volunteer for taking the code review work of it. Thanks so much! Here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120759 your ZhengFan
[Call For Feature Test] The TOC fidelity enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting
Hi, Community: I have finished the TOC enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting, which design proposal was discussed in WIKI page: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC And the all modification for the feature was delivered into the SVN revision 1380613 of branches/writer001 already, which is ready for test. Here is the issue link in BugZilla: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963 So, is there any volunteer for the QA work on this feature? Thanks so much! Yours, Easyfan
Re: [Call For Feature Test] The TOC fidelity enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting
Hi, XiaoTing: Thanks so much for your kindly support. 2012/9/6 Xiao Ting Xiao tingxi...@gmail.com I'd like to test the feature. On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Community: I have finished the TOC enhancement in MSO Word 2003 binary format importing/exporting, which design proposal was discussed in WIKI page: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOC And the all modification for the feature was delivered into the SVN revision 1380613 of branches/writer001 already, which is ready for test. Here is the issue link in BugZilla: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963 So, is there any volunteer for the QA work on this feature? Thanks so much! Yours, Easyfan
[Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's spacing is not correct when open the .doc file
Hi, Community: I have fixed a defect issue 120716 in BugZilla, which need your kindly support on solution review, here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717 Thanks a lot!
Re: [Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's spacing is not correct when open the .doc file
Sorry, the link is incorrect for this issue, update it. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717 6 2012/8/30 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com Hi, Community: I have fixed a defect issue 120716 in BugZilla, which need your kindly support on solution review, here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717 6 Thanks a lot!
[Call For Review]Issue 120716: [From Symphony] The graphic's border size and spacing is not correct when opne the .doc file
Hi, Community: I have fixed the issue 120716 in the BugZilla, which need your kindly support on solution review, here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717 6 Thanks a lot!
[Call For Review] Issue 120718: [From Symphony]After save the sample file with page border and shadow to doc, the shadow depth and color changed
Hi Community: I have fixed a issue 120718 in BugZilla, which need your kindly support on solution review, here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=12071https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=120717 8 Thanks a lot!
[Discussion/Review Request] The MSO Word interoperability issues solution on page border
Hi, Community: Inside AOO Writer, there are some MSO Word interoperability issues on the page border stuff. After the first step investigation, something show that it is not a simple or defect level work, so I wrote a document about the issue and possible solution on it, and post into Wiki. Here is the link: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/MSInteroperability/PageBorder For you discuss and review, thanks for your kindly comments and supporting.
Re: Save as mobi or prc and epub
Hi, Cherise: So sorry that I missed this thread before, which I am actually interested in. About the e-book exporting stuff, would you please tell me more about the details you want? Or whether could you please answer my following questions? 1. When exporting to an e-book, should we consider the fidelity as we always do for the other kind exchange file exporting? 2. should such exported e-book files could be auto-fit-able for different reading devices? 3. What should be the good design, for certain contents, page header/footer/footnote/reference for example? 4. Whether the PDF file can not satisfy your e-book requirements, and why? 5. The large scale and in-split-able objects, a big figure for example, should be zoomed for presenting? 6. As the wireless printing, Air Print and Cloud Print for example, is coming popular, do you also have such requirement on e-book? 7. The contents inside a e-book should be designed to be able to be selected and COPY/PASTE? 8. What should be a good design for splitting tables in e-book? Maybe questions above are somehow ridiculous to an experienced e-book user. Sorry for that. I have to confess that, I want to help AOO to own such kind capability on exporting e-books, but I have very little user experiences as a e-book reader. So thank you so much for your tips on that! Have a good day. 2012/7/11 Rob Weir robw...@apache.org On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Cherise Kelley cherise_kel...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello, Is there any chance that Open Office will add the option to save as Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing ready mobi or prc and Barnes and Noble ready epub and iBookstore ready files, etc? Hello Cherise, There are some extensions that give some ebook support, which you can find by searching our extensions site here: http://extensions.services.openoffice.org However, I am not aware of any current initiative to add such support to the core program. Apache OpenOffice is an open source software, programmed, translated, tested and supported by volunteers. So there is certainly the possibility to add such support, but only if volunteers step up to write the code, or an author of existing code agrees to contribute it to the project. If you know anyone who might be interested in this, please send them here, to this mailing list. Regards, -Rob Users currently go through convoluted methods to do this, involving three or more applications. http://www.kindleboards.com/index.php/topic,120045.0.html Thanks, Cherise Kelley http://size12bystpatricksday.blogspot.com/
Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor
2012/7/2 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 26.06.2012 03:57, Fan Zheng wrote: Seeing my reply in following blue lines please: 2012/6/25 ZuoJun Chen zjchen...@gmail.com Hi, The idea sounds good to me. The task needs to accomplish piece by piece from my point of view. I'm look into text repaint process in word processor and trying to fix the character painting error in issue.119476 when inserting and deleting the text in first line of paragraph. Seems adding additional spacing before paragraph case to enlarge the repaint rectangle of paragraph line in SwTxtFrm::FormatLine(..) may be able to partially fix the problem. and the problem disturbs me is also how to store additional information :( 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 22.06.2012 18:18, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, Oliver: In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should not change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem. So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now we know, Under the following situations: a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0; b. The type of line-spacing is Exactly; c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height; MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff commonly because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background height and flying object positing stuff. In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings we talked about, and we want to fix it. So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion, we should consider following candidates: a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above condition, as ZJ already done perfectly; b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting (including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped already to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking method on working with big line spacing. Such method may need to change the VisArea of a SwTxtFrm; c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I really do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there. d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this; So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very beginning of big works. I agree to ZhengFan's analysis. Now, we need to discuss how we address these issues. My view one this is the following (propsal for discussion): - Let us separate the stuff regarding the character painting and the object positioning stuff in two issue. 119476 for the character painting, new issue for the object positioning stuff. - Character painting stuff: -- I am in favor of a solution which does not change our intrinsic text formatting and line portion creation algorithm. Thus, to solve the repaint and selection problem we can store additional information - the additional space taken by the character painting - at the SwTxtFrm instance in order to access it during painting and selection actions. The additional space taken for the character painting is already part of the frame area (member SwTxtFrm::aFrm), but not part of the frame printing area (member SwTxtFrm::aPrt). 1 Concern: Could such additional information to be available in ODF Standard? If not, whether it means that, the conversion from MS-Word Doc to ODT lead different representation result? I do not think that this is an ODF issue. The ODF specification does not say anything about the need to clip the text, if it does not fit into the given/calculated line height. Hi, Oliver: So what will happen, if we give the support on such clipping stuff in MS Word for the issue we discussed, and then save the document into an ODT file? Best regards, Oliver.
Re: 3.4.1_release_blocker requested: [Bug 120045] Format case change crashes OOo
So the issue is still there? I will take a look on it, but not sure about the schedule, for the TOC loading enhancement is on going... I will update the status if I have some progress. 2012/7/2 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 21.06.2012 08:23, De Bin Lei wrote: 2012/6/21 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/21/12 8:02 AM, De Bin Lei wrote: Got it. so it is a crash and regression one. +1 for 3.4.1 release blocker from my view, thx. +1, I will set the release blocker flag for 3.4.1. Debin, Will you merge it in the AOO340 branch? Yes, I will. However, there is no fix for it. Anyway I will take care of the code check in for 3.4.1 branch. just a question: Is somebody working on a fix for this issue? Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [BUG 3.4] Printer quality settings wrong in AOO 3.4
Sorry, we may need more detail information about your issue. Which platform are you using? Windows, Linux or MacOS ? 2012/7/1 Marco A.G.Pinto marcoagpi...@mail.telepac.pt Hi! I noticed that every time I want to print to my wireless HP Officeject, the printing settings are at best quality and photo paper. It is very hard to change the settings since they always default to that. It is just a bug report. Kind regards, Marco A.G.Pinto --- --
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Good news and thanks Terry. So the bug would be closed automatically or, need I do anything further? 2012/6/29 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com Test again on trunk r1355082 which include modules nss and moz. From the result I think we can close this bug. Test with 3 scenario. A. Saved with password, then remove password with same revision B. Saved with password with OOo3.3, then remove password with r1355082 C. Saved with password with MS 2003, then remove password with r1355082 Result: Scenario A: ods/xls/odt/odp work fine doc can saved with password successfully, but when reopen the saved file, it is under read-only mode. This also repro on OOo 3.3 ppt is weird, in OOo 3.3, In saved dialog, the password check box can check, input password and saved the file then reopen it, No need password, so saved with password in OOo3.3 for ppt format is not work. In trunk r1355082, In saved dialog, saveing with password checkbox is disabled If we saved ppt file with password protect by OpenOffice, then open in MS Office, no need input password, so it is totally not work. Scenario B: ods/xls/odt/odp work fine doc file with password open under read-only mode, we can saved to another file to remove password. ppt file can't saved with password protect Scenario C: xls work fine doc file with password open under read-only mode, we can saved to another file to remove password. ppt file with password protect by MS office can't open in Open Office, it said Read Error. the loading of password-encrypted Microsoft PowerPint presentations is not supported. For PPT issue, there have 2 bugs about saved(Bug 39527) and loading(Bug 46307) For doc open with read-only mode issue, i think it is a know issue, but i can't find the bug in bugzilla, I will double check in bugzilla. Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:20:54 +0200 From: orwittm...@googlemail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) Hi, On 28.06.2012 11:08, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, sorry for top posting - it is reply to the complete discussion regarding save with password This functionality for ODF documents is available when the build includes modules nss and moz. I am not sure, if our buildbots include these modules. I will check it. win7 buildbot includes nss and moz linux32 buildbot includes nss and moz linux64 buildbot includes nss and moz But, as you may have notice since a couple of days our buildbots have problems to create new packages. last sucessful build for win7 was on 2012-06-19 last sucessful build for linux32 was on 2012-06-20 last sucessful build for linxu64 was on 2012-06-17 none of these contains the fix for issue 119366 Best regards, Oliver. Best regards, Oliver. On 28.06.2012 10:21, YangTerry wrote: Just confirm with our build owner, moz package is not in the build. Will verify and update the result after download the trunk build from BuildBot. Thanks Fan Zheng help (*^__^*) From: polo8...@hotmail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:02:31 +0800 Will confirm with our local build owner. Also download the trunk build from http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ Thanks for your investgate. Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:19:39 +0800 Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Hold a second, you guys are using the download build on verifying, right? If so, that means some problems there. Maybe the release build env broken? 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com Muhaha, lucky for me that I have 3 build enviroment on verification this, all of them are under Windows XP. The difference are: In build env A, there is no moz package involved; In build env B, there is moz package involved, but without my solution of issue 119366; In build env C, there is moz package involved and with my solution of issue 119366; And I did the following test cases: In env A: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, failed, with error
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Muhaha, lucky for me that I have 3 build enviroment on verification this, all of them are under Windows XP. The difference are: In build env A, there is no moz package involved; In build env B, there is moz package involved, but without my solution of issue 119366; In build env C, there is moz package involved and with my solution of issue 119366; And I did the following test cases: In env A: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; In env B: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; In env C: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; Conclution: Such error messages are caused missing moz package building involved. And such I/O error message only occurs in the ODF format file saving with password. Both ODF format saving with password and OFFICE format saving with password have the issue 119366; My solution could work on both MS office files saving and ODF format saving; For you review. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com I can saved .ods file without password successfully, also can save .xls successfully. Only when i saved our format (like .ods) file with password, this error pop up. Also failed to open our format file with password. So it should not be related with build without moz package. Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:57:14 +0800 Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced. 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com The error message General Error: Generral input/output error looks so farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such dialog will show up. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384. If we saved with our format(.ods) Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is General Error: Generral input/output error, also failed open the password protect .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct password. Reopen this bug. My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls), successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the password. Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password. Seems something wrong in our format save with password logic. Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:27:56 +0200 From: orwittm...@googlemail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) Hi
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Hold a second, you guys are using the download build on verifying, right? If so, that means some problems there. Maybe the release build env broken? 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com Muhaha, lucky for me that I have 3 build enviroment on verification this, all of them are under Windows XP. The difference are: In build env A, there is no moz package involved; In build env B, there is moz package involved, but without my solution of issue 119366; In build env C, there is moz package involved and with my solution of issue 119366; And I did the following test cases: In env A: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, failed, with error message General Error: Generral input/output error; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; In env B: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; But in continual case: Save As without password, failed; In env C: 1.1 Save into ODT, without password, passed; 1.2 Save into ODT, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 1.3 Save into DOC, without password, passed; 1.4 Save into DOC, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 2.1 Save into ODP, without password, passed; 2.2 Save into ODP,with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 2.3 Save into PPT, without password, passed; 2.4 Save into PPT, the saveing with password checkbox is disabled... Weird. 3.1 Save into ODS, without password, passed; 3.2 Save into ODS, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; 3.3 Save into XLS, without password, passed; 3.4 Save into XLS, with password, passed; In continual case: Save As without password, Passed; Conclution: Such error messages are caused missing moz package building involved. And such I/O error message only occurs in the ODF format file saving with password. Both ODF format saving with password and OFFICE format saving with password have the issue 119366; My solution could work on both MS office files saving and ODF format saving; For you review. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com I can saved .ods file without password successfully, also can save .xls successfully. Only when i saved our format (like .ods) file with password, this error pop up. Also failed to open our format file with password. So it should not be related with build without moz package. Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:57:14 +0800 Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) From: zheng.easy...@gmail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced. 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com The error message General Error: Generral input/output error looks so farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such dialog will show up. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384. If we saved with our format(.ods) Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is General Error: Generral input/output error, also failed open the password protect .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct password. Reopen this bug. My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls), successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the password. Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password
Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963
Hi, See my answer below in blue 2012/6/27 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 14.06.2012 14:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote: This is the I implementation of the proposal described in thread Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document..review comments expected... On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zhengzheng.easy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all: This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot! Here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963 I am volunteering to review the patch. Here is my first minor feedback on the patch: The changes to /sw/inc/tox.hxx and the call of method SwTOXBase::**SetMSTOCExpression(..) in /sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par5.**cxx are not needed for enhancement 119963 from my point of view. Right? For me it looks like that these changes are already for the next improvement step - exporting imported Microsoft Word TOC. Right? Oliver, you are so right. Yes, such maMSTOCExpression corresponding stuff is not necessarily the case, and yes, those things are prepared fo exporting job of TOC in next step. I will remove them ASAP. If yes, I would propose to remove this change for now. Back to the code for further review. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963
Not the updated patch is already uploaded into bugzilla. For you review. thanks. 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com Hi, See my answer below in blue 2012/6/27 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 14.06.2012 14:11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote: This is the I implementation of the proposal described in thread Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document..review comments expected... On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zhengzheng.easy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all: This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot! Here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963 I am volunteering to review the patch. Here is my first minor feedback on the patch: The changes to /sw/inc/tox.hxx and the call of method SwTOXBase::**SetMSTOCExpression(..) in /sw/source/filter/ww8/ww8par5.**cxx are not needed for enhancement 119963 from my point of view. Right? For me it looks like that these changes are already for the next improvement step - exporting imported Microsoft Word TOC. Right? Oliver, you are so right. Yes, such maMSTOCExpression corresponding stuff is not necessarily the case, and yes, those things are prepared fo exporting job of TOC in next step. I will remove them ASAP. If yes, I would propose to remove this change for now. Back to the code for further review. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
The error message General Error: Generral input/output error looks so farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such dialog will show up. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384. If we saved with our format(.ods) Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is General Error: Generral input/output error, also failed open the password protect .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct password. Reopen this bug. My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls), successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the password. Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password. Seems something wrong in our format save with password logic. Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:27:56 +0200 From: orwittm...@googlemail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) Hi, On 26.06.2012 14:05, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, On 26.06.2012 09:53, Fan Zheng wrote: Root cause: Seems the logic of Save As and Save inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty weird anyway. A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is responsible to: 1. Directly Save request, but exclude the very first time on Save without original URL path; 2. SaveAs request, with the same URL information as former; B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient consideration. Which means, such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on changing Version Comments, Author, Interaction Handler and status Indicator. C, Saving with password is a kind of external saving parameter. The saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have enable the check box Save with password in File Save As dialog. Otherwise, saving parameters set wont contain password corresponding items. Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of following scenarios: 1. In the Save request, whatever the password originally enabled or not, as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password setting stuff. Everything is OK. 2. And in the SaveAs request with password originally disabled: 2.1 If the user keep the Save with password disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency; 2.2 If the user change the Save with password from disable to enable in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result; 3. In the SaveAs request with password originally enabled: 3.1 If the user keep the Save with password enabled in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency; 3.2 If the user change the Save with password from enabled to disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens. So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be: 1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2; 2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher efficiency; 3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway; For you reference. The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later. Thanks for this really deep and well founded analysis. I am currently reviewing the new patch. patch looks good - I will commit it to trunk and branch AOO34 soon. Thx ZhengFan. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
And I my local, (WinXP env), seems such issues can not be reproduced. 2012/6/28 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com The error message General Error: Generral input/output error looks so farmilliar... I remember that in the build without moz package inside, such dialog will show up. 2012/6/28 YangTerry polo8...@hotmail.com Verify not fixed on trunk r1354384. If we saved with our format(.ods) Failed to saved with password, the failed message in dialog is General Error: Generral input/output error, also failed open the password protect .ods file, it pop up password incorrect dialog but i input correct password. Reopen this bug. My Platform is Win 7 X64 EN.If we saved with MS format (.xls), successfully saved it with password and also work fine to removed the password. Also work fine saved file(.ods) without password. Seems something wrong in our format save with password logic. Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:27:56 +0200 From: orwittm...@googlemail.com To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366) Hi, On 26.06.2012 14:05, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote: Hi, On 26.06.2012 09:53, Fan Zheng wrote: Root cause: Seems the logic of Save As and Save inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty weird anyway. A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is responsible to: 1. Directly Save request, but exclude the very first time on Save without original URL path; 2. SaveAs request, with the same URL information as former; B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient consideration. Which means, such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on changing Version Comments, Author, Interaction Handler and status Indicator. C, Saving with password is a kind of external saving parameter. The saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have enable the check box Save with password in File Save As dialog. Otherwise, saving parameters set wont contain password corresponding items. Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of following scenarios: 1. In the Save request, whatever the password originally enabled or not, as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password setting stuff. Everything is OK. 2. And in the SaveAs request with password originally disabled: 2.1 If the user keep the Save with password disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency; 2.2 If the user change the Save with password from disable to enable in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result; 3. In the SaveAs request with password originally enabled: 3.1 If the user keep the Save with password enabled in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency; 3.2 If the user change the Save with password from enabled to disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens. So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be: 1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2; 2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher efficiency; 3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway; For you reference. The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later. Thanks for this really deep and well founded analysis. I am currently reviewing the new patch. patch looks good - I will commit it to trunk and branch AOO34 soon. Thx ZhengFan. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Root cause: Seems the logic of Save As and Save inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty weird anyway. A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is responsible to: 1. Directly Save request, but exclude the very first time on Save without original URL path; 2. SaveAs request, with the same URL information as former; B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient consideration. Which means, such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on changing Version Comments, Author, Interaction Handler and status Indicator. C, Saving with password is a kind of external saving parameter. The saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have enable the check box Save with password in File Save As dialog. Otherwise, saving parameters set wont contain password corresponding items. Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of following scenarios: 1. In the Save request, whatever the password originally enabled or not, as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password setting stuff. Everything is OK. 2. And in the SaveAs request with password originally disabled: 2.1 If the user keep the Save with password disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency; 2.2 If the user change the Save with password from disable to enable in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result; 3. In the SaveAs request with password originally enabled: 3.1 If the user keep the Save with password enabled in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency; 3.2 If the user change the Save with password from enabled to disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens. So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be: 1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2; 2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher efficiency; 3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway; For you reference. The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later. 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi On 25.06.2012 13:32, Fan Zheng wrote: o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with this issue. thanks a lot！ No problem. I have assigned this issue to you. I am looking forward to see your solution. Best regards, Oliver. 在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com 写道： Hi, On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, All: This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers. In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process, both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password on a document. Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl(**) in file SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.**cxx:line 595-599 please. And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with deselecting the check box of Save with password, the result parameter set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern about the password stuff anymore. But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD was cleared, but SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA was not. The issue happens. For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA clearing in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD. I have reviewed the patch. Please see my comments in the issue [1] and [2] [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c9 https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Now the new patch was updated onto bugzilla, for you review. 2012/6/26 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com Root cause: Seems the logic of Save As and Save inside Apache OpenOffice is pretty weird anyway. A, inside AOO, the method SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf is the entry for storing file into the original URL path if it has one. Which means, such method is responsible to: 1. Directly Save request, but exclude the very first time on Save without original URL path; 2. SaveAs request, with the same URL information as former; B, as such method is only focus on storing back into to original file, it is designed as an incremental saving pattern for certain efficient consideration. Which means, such function do not allow external saving parameters except the ones on changing Version Comments, Author, Interaction Handler and status Indicator. C, Saving with password is a kind of external saving parameter. The saving parameters set will contain a password item inside, if users have enable the check box Save with password in File Save As dialog. Otherwise, saving parameters set wont contain password corresponding items. Combine the above 3 conditions, we can take a deeper inside look of following scenarios: 1. In the Save request, whatever the password originally enabled or not, as no further different setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, including the URL path and password setting stuff. Everything is OK. 2. And in the SaveAs request with password originally disabled: 2.1 If the user keep the Save with password disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password disabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result and high efficiency; 2.2 If the user change the Save with password from disable to enable in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Also keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result; 3. In the SaveAs request with password originally enabled: 3.1 If the user keep the Save with password enabled in File Save As dialog, as external saving parameter was added into saving parameters set, which do not satisfy the verification of parameters, such SaveAs request will be returned from SfxBaseModel::StoreSelf, and actually finished inside the common SaveAs method with password enabled. Keep the consistence between UI setting and exact result, but with lower efficiency; 3.2 If the user change the Save with password from enabled to disabled in File Save As dialog, as no further setting applied, the storing process will directly apply the former saving parameters set, still with password enabled, as oppose to the UI setting. The issue happens. So, a reasonable solution of this issue should be: 1. No process and saving parameter change on scenario 1 and 2; 2. In scenario 3.1, remove the external password parameter as the originally enabled, and makes it finished in StoreSelf for higher efficiency; 3. In scenario 3.2, do not trying to use StoreSelf anyway; For you reference. The code patch will be submitted for reviewing later. 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi On 25.06.2012 13:32, Fan Zheng wrote: o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with this issue. thanks a lot！ No problem. I have assigned this issue to you. I am looking forward to see your solution. Best regards, Oliver. 在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com 写道： Hi, On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, All: This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers. In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process, both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password on a document. Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl(**) in file SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.**cxx:line 595-599 please. And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with deselecting the check box of Save with password, the result parameter set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern about the password stuff anymore. But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD was cleared, but SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA was not. The issue happens. For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA clearing in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD. I have reviewed the patch
Re: [Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963
I have attached a series of sample files for FVT in Bugzilla. For you reference. 2012/6/14 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 14.06.2012 13:58, chengjh wrote: This is the I implementation of the proposal described in thread Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document..review comments expected... On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Fan Zhengzheng.easy...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all: This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot! Here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119963https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963 I am volunteering to review the patch. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
Hi, All: This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers. In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process, both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password on a document. Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl() in file SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.cxx:line 595-599 please. And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with deselecting the check box of Save with password, the result parameter set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern about the password stuff anymore. But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD was cleared, but SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA was not. The issue happens. For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA clearing in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD. 2012/6/19 Jürgen Schmidt jogischm...@googlemail.com On 6/18/12 1:16 AM, Rob Weir wrote: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366 This is a regression introduced in OOo 3.4 beta but not detected in AOO 3.4 tested. Once a password is set it cannot be removed. Two users have reported it. -Rob can we agree on subject line like [RELEASE][3.4.1]: that makes it easier to track all release relevant things +1 for this issue Juergen
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
o, i miss the situation you mentioned. OK, i will keep on working with this issue. thanks a lot！ 在 2012-6-25 晚上7:11，Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com写道： Hi, On 25.06.2012 10:20, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, All: This issue was solved, now call for the reviewers. In general, this is a setting confusion issue. In current saving process, both SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA and SID_PASSWORD are working for setting password on a document. Refer to the SfxObjectShell::ExecFile_Impl(**) in file SRC/sfx2/source/doc/objserv.**cxx:line 595-599 please. And, as what we imagine, after doing the file dialog executing with deselecting the check box of Save with password, the result parameter set, which is to customize saving process, wont record said 2 SID inside anymore, for indicating that the following saving process will not concern about the password stuff anymore. But when performing the exact preparation SaveAs process in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), only the the default SID_PASSWORD was cleared, but SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA was not. The issue happens. For solving it, we just simply add the item SID_ENCRYPTIONDATA clearing in SfxobjectShell::PreDoSaveAs_**impl(), similar as the SID_PASSWORD. I have reviewed the patch. Please see my comments in the issue [1] and [2] [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c9https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c9 [2] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c11https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119366#c11 Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor
Seeing my reply in following blue lines please: 2012/6/25 ZuoJun Chen zjchen...@gmail.com Hi, The idea sounds good to me. The task needs to accomplish piece by piece from my point of view. I'm look into text repaint process in word processor and trying to fix the character painting error in issue.119476 when inserting and deleting the text in first line of paragraph. Seems adding additional spacing before paragraph case to enlarge the repaint rectangle of paragraph line in SwTxtFrm::FormatLine(..) may be able to partially fix the problem. and the problem disturbs me is also how to store additional information :( 2012/6/25 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 22.06.2012 18:18, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, Oliver: In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should not change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem. So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now we know, Under the following situations: a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0; b. The type of line-spacing is Exactly; c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height; MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff commonly because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background height and flying object positing stuff. In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings we talked about, and we want to fix it. So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion, we should consider following candidates: a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above condition, as ZJ already done perfectly; b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting (including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped already to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking method on working with big line spacing. Such method may need to change the VisArea of a SwTxtFrm; c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I really do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there. d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this; So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very beginning of big works. I agree to ZhengFan's analysis. Now, we need to discuss how we address these issues. My view one this is the following (propsal for discussion): - Let us separate the stuff regarding the character painting and the object positioning stuff in two issue. 119476 for the character painting, new issue for the object positioning stuff. - Character painting stuff: -- I am in favor of a solution which does not change our intrinsic text formatting and line portion creation algorithm. Thus, to solve the repaint and selection problem we can store additional information - the additional space taken by the character painting - at the SwTxtFrm instance in order to access it during painting and selection actions. The additional space taken for the character painting is already part of the frame area (member SwTxtFrm::aFrm), but not part of the frame printing area (member SwTxtFrm::aPrt). 1 Concern: Could such additional information to be available in ODF Standard? If not, whether it means that, the conversion from MS-Word Doc to ODT lead different representation result? What do other think about it? Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor
Hi, Oliver: In some degree, I changed my mind following your answer that, we should not change the definition of SvxLineSpacingItem. So based on the discussion we already have, we can do some summary. Now we know, Under the following situations: a. Value of above-paragraph-spacing greater than 0; b. The type of line-spacing is Exactly; c. The value of line-spacing is less than the font height; MS Word will consider the above-paragraph-spacing as the additional line-spacing for the first line. Also, MS Word doing funny stuff commonly because the in-consistent process mechanism, such as the background height and flying object positing stuff. In a further step, we considered that AOO has fidelity issues on representing such kind of MS Word document with the properties settings we talked about, and we want to fix it. So far so good. But what should be the range of the fix? In my opinion, we should consider following candidates: a. Preventing the text presentation clipping in first line in above condition, as ZJ already done perfectly; b. Consistency behavior of paint refresh and cursor selection; The hard point of this one is that, when refreshing a line portion painting (including the selection range stuff), the paint range is clipped already to fit the size of line portion. We may need some kind of breaking method on working with big line spacing. Such method may need to change the VisArea of a SwTxtFrm; c. Following the in-consistent process mechanism that MS Word has; I really do not want it, but without it, the fidelity issues still there. d. Making the documents loaded from ODF files also work like this; So for me, ZuoJun's work maybe acceptable, but it is only a very beginning of big works. 2012/6/21 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com Hi, On 21.06.2012 11:23, Fan Zheng wrote: Hi, All: Let me talk about my concern. Regarding the value is correct, there may exist the formatting mechanism difference. 1. MS Word consider the above-paragraph-spacing + line-spacing (may also including the below-paragraph-spacing? not sure) as the available vertical space for containing text; My investigation of MS word 2003 and 2010 reveals the following: - the additional space of above-paragraph-spacing for rendering the text of the first text line. - the below-paragraph-spacing from the previous paragraph is _not_ used for rendering the text of the first text line. - for the character background and the paragraph background the above-paragraph-spacing is _not_ used. Thus, it looks very funny in MS Word 2003/2010 when the additional space is used for the characters, but not for the different backgrounds. - for object positioning the above-paragraph-spacing is used. Thus, an object whose vertical position is 0cm to the top of the line also looks funny from my point of view. My conclusion here is that MS Word is doing really inconsistent and funny things. 2. OpenOffice consider the ling-spacing only as the available vertical space for containing text; Is that correct? If yes, then the inner value of line-spacing inside SvxLineSpacingItem should actually equal to the value of above-paragraph-spacing + line-spacing stored in DOC files; And in my opinion, such modification should be in filter but not in formatting; Yes, for your question. But I disagree regarding adjusting the value of the SvxLineSpacingItem: (1) We have no SvxLineSpacingItem for the first line and the rest of the text lines. Such a features also does not exist in ODF. From my point of view such a feature does not make sense. (2) The above-paragaph-spacing belongs to the corresponding Svx...Item which represent the paragraphh margins. (3) MS Word is doing really inconsistent and funny things here. I am proposing _not_ to reflect these in our document model. A further question is: as the total vertical space include above, line and below are actually available for containing text, why MS Word trying to distinguish them? On some other words, what the exact meaning of above and below paragraph spacing in MS word? As I am not the expert of MS Word and its file format I can not answer these questions. From my point of view only MS experts can answer them. And following the tips from Oliver, such value should only works on the first line of paragraph. So whether it means that, the above-paragraph-spacing has some kind of difference definition to the UL space inside OpenOffice? Here, I am not sure, if I am getting the point. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Question about text clipping mechanism in word processor
Hi, All: Let me talk about my concern. Regarding the value is correct, there may exist the formatting mechanism difference. 1. MS Word consider the above-paragraph-spacing + line-spacing (may also including the below-paragraph-spacing? not sure) as the available vertical space for containing text; 2. OpenOffice consider the ling-spacing only as the available vertical space for containing text; Is that correct? If yes, then the inner value of line-spacing inside SvxLineSpacingItem should actually equal to the value of above-paragraph-spacing + line-spacing stored in DOC files; And in my opinion, such modification should be in filter but not in formatting; A further question is: as the total vertical space include above, line and below are actually available for containing text, why MS Word trying to distinguish them? On some other words, what the exact meaning of above and below paragraph spacing in MS word? And following the tips from Oliver, such value should only works on the first line of paragraph. So whether it means that, the above-paragraph-spacing has some kind of difference definition to the UL space inside OpenOffice? 2012/6/20 Joost Andrae joost.and...@gmx.de Hi, Am 20.06.2012 13:43, schrieb ZuoJun Chen: Hi, Fan I have extracted parameter from first paragraph in sample file 1 Spacing before paragraph 18pt in doc file 2 above-paragraph-spacing in SvxULSpaceItem: 360 3 line-spacing of said para in doc file: 12pt 4 line-spacing of said para in SvxLineSpacingItem:240 Seems that the value mapping works, Looking forward to your further response:) soffice internally uses twips and msoffice uses pt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Twip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twip Above values are correct. Kind regards, Joost
Re: Propose for 3.4.1: Can't remove password from file (119366)
I would like to take a look on this issue, maybe giving response in several days. 2012/6/18 Raphael Bircher r.birc...@gmx.ch Am 18.06.12 04:00, schrieb Xia Zhao: Agree this should be taken as 341 release blocker considering this release will fix security ones and critical regression. +1 to make this issue a release blocker Greetings Raphael -- My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/
Re: Does MS Word Binary Document Contain the Page Count Info?
Hi, Please take a look on Dop(Document Properties)::DopBase::cPg, which maybe is what you want. 2012/6/18 chengjh chen...@apache.org I want to get the exact page count info during loading a MS Word binary document,not from AOO after layout formatting.I have studied the specification of MS Word binary format,but I didn't find the description..I am afraid that I missed something..Anyone can give me a hand?Thanks. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Re: [Code] Build Error in bootstrap on Mac
hi, YongLin: Although I did not met the same issue in Mac building process, I remember that the OpenOffice build guide in Windows has mentioned a similar issue. So perhaps you could take a look on it, some kind of PERL package installation stuff. Here is the link: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide/Building_on_Windows#installing_additional_perl_modules_in_cygwin 2012/6/15 Yong Lin Ma mayo...@apache.org Mac OS X 10.6 Fresh code checked out yesterday (14 Jun) autoconf ./configure --with-dmake-url= http://dmake.apache-extras.org.codespot.com/files/dmake-4.12.tar.bz2 --with-epm-url=http://ftp.easysw.com/pub/epm/3.7/epm-3.7-source.tar.gz --disable-build-mozilla --enable-verbose --enable-category-b --enable-minimizer --enable-presenter-console --enable-wiki-publisher --disable-mozilla ./bootstrap source-9.0.0.7-bj.zip exists, md5 is OK ignoring silgraphite-2.3.1.tar.gz because its prerequisites are not fulfilled bsh-2.0b1-src.tar.gz exists, md5 is OK downloading 1 missing tar balls to /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/ext_sources downloading to /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/ext_sources/377a60170e5185eb63d3ed2fae98e621-README_silgraphite-2.3.1.txt.part Can't locate object method show_progress via package LWP::UserAgent at /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/main/solenv/bin/download_external_dependencies.pl line 442, $in line 352. making and entering /Volumes/Mac/aoo34/ooo/main/solenv/ unxmacxi.pro/misc/build/ can not find the dmake package Anyone can help? Thank you.
[Call For Review] Bugzilla 119963
Hi, all: This is ZhengFan. I have finished the bug fix/feature implementation of bugzilla 119963. Now the patch was attached for review. Thanks a lot! Here is the link: https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119963
Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document
Well, good news. Then the efforts on TOC improvement stuff in ooxml filter would be smaller. But sorry that I do not exactly know the detail process of ooxml loading. l need some time on investigation. 在 2012-6-14 傍晚6:34，Ying Zhang tldy...@gmail.com写道： thx Zheng Fan, yes, I'm thinking on the support of OOXML TOC import, and ooxml filter could support nested field, but I'm not sure whether it's the only blocker issue for ooxml toc support, do you have any idea about the solution? 2012/6/13 Fan Zheng zheng.easy...@gmail.com to Zhang ying: it is possible for ooxml filter on having this improvement, if the nested fields could be supported. 在 2012-5-30 上午9:58，Ying Zhang tldy...@gmail.com写道： I see only the improvement for interoperability with MS Binary file format been mentioned. But since the same problems exist for MS OOXML file format. Could we consider both and find whether we could define same mechanism and same scope to make it consistence with each other. I would like to take the MS OOXML part. 2012/5/29 chengjh chen...@apache.org Oliver,welcome... On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 29.05.2012 09:24, chengjh wrote: Hi All, TOC(Table of Contents) is a significant feature in Aoo Writer..Although,it has provided powerful capabilities to benefit end users for productivity, the followed areas,especially the fidelity with MS Word, still need improvements..I propose them and put them as the candidates https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning of the next release for your comments...thanks. 1)The TOC data of a MS Word document is not parsed completely.And the actual TOC data is from silently updating once a MS Word Document loaded.Thus,the fidelity can not be ensured especially when the document contents that impact TOC have been changed after creating TOC in MS Word.So,we propose to implement the TOC loading process to replace the update action. 2)The tab between chapter number and TOC entry lost when loading a MS Word document,which leads to different gap between chapter number and TOC entry.That looks different from MS Word. 3)Jump info will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by un-checking Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers. To this kind of TOC,end users can only press ctrl+mouse to click the page number of the TOC entry for jumping in MS Word. 4)The customized character attributes will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by un-checking Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers. To this kind of TOC,the customized character attributes of the target paragraphs can be collected into TOC in MS Word. Such an improvement makes sense from my point of view. If possible I would help on this. Best regards, Oliver. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
Introduction of myself
Hi, Everybody: This is Zheng Fan speaking. Well, I am a brand new face in AOO community, with subscribing the ooo-dev mailing list just 2 weeks ago. I start working in IBM Symhony project in 2003 and being focus in Word Processor corresponding area since 2006, Before that, I was worked in the Presentation team for about 3 years. Now, my mainly responsibility is on the issues and features in the core function of Word Processor, including data model, formatting and user behavior management. Also, I have a little bit experience on the MS Word 2003 binary format interoperability and Mac OS native printing field. Hope that my contribution could make AOO being more strong and fancy, and help you people on issues and requirements. I would be very happen on communicating with all of you, on the issues, suggestions, what ever. That is all. Thanks a lot! yours Zheng Fan 2012-06-15
Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document
you are right. I will change the design later. Thanks a lot! 在 2012-6-13 晚上7:22，Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com写道： Hi, On 12.06.2012 16:20, chengjh wrote: The function specification and design are ready for review now..Please access http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOChttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer/TOCto review the FS section Loading of MS Word TOC=Binary Format=Function Specification and the design section Loading of MS Word TOC=Binary Format=Design Description..You are welcome to comment...thanks. I already had a look at the wiki and made some minor changes. Additionally, I think the we still want to collect certain paragraphs as headings, when we are loading the main content. But, we do not want to update the read TOC regarding the collected headings. Right? Thus, I propose to remove the sentence Heading paragraphs collecting step removal, indicate the step 5 above;. I have already marked this sentence in the wiki by striking it. If this is ok, we can completely remove it. Best regards, Oliver.
Re: Propose to Implement the Loading of TOC and Improve TOC Fidelity with MS Word Binary Document
to Zhang ying: it is possible for ooxml filter on having this improvement, if the nested fields could be supported. 在 2012-5-30 上午9:58，Ying Zhang tldy...@gmail.com写道： I see only the improvement for interoperability with MS Binary file format been mentioned. But since the same problems exist for MS OOXML file format. Could we consider both and find whether we could define same mechanism and same scope to make it consistence with each other. I would like to take the MS OOXML part. 2012/5/29 chengjh chen...@apache.org Oliver,welcome... On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann orwittm...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, On 29.05.2012 09:24, chengjh wrote: Hi All, TOC(Table of Contents) is a significant feature in Aoo Writer..Although,it has provided powerful capabilities to benefit end users for productivity, the followed areas,especially the fidelity with MS Word, still need improvements..I propose them and put them as the candidates https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+4.0+Feature+Planning of the next release for your comments...thanks. 1)The TOC data of a MS Word document is not parsed completely.And the actual TOC data is from silently updating once a MS Word Document loaded.Thus,the fidelity can not be ensured especially when the document contents that impact TOC have been changed after creating TOC in MS Word.So,we propose to implement the TOC loading process to replace the update action. 2)The tab between chapter number and TOC entry lost when loading a MS Word document,which leads to different gap between chapter number and TOC entry.That looks different from MS Word. 3)Jump info will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by un-checking Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers. To this kind of TOC,end users can only press ctrl+mouse to click the page number of the TOC entry for jumping in MS Word. 4)The customized character attributes will be lost when loading MS Word TOC created by un-checking Use hyperlinks instead of page numbers. To this kind of TOC,the customized character attributes of the target paragraphs can be collected into TOC in MS Word. Such an improvement makes sense from my point of view. If possible I would help on this. Best regards, Oliver. -- Best Regards,Jianhong Cheng
