[libreoffice-users] Re: How to find out which fonts are used in an Open Document?
Pedro wrote > > Robert Funnell wrote >> What about unzipping the .odt/.odp/whatever file and searching for >> font names in the resulting .xml files? (Again, I haven't tried this.) > That would make sense. Unfortunately the file styles.xml lists some 55 > fonts > From a PDF copy of the presentation I can see that there should be 15 > different fonts, so the xml is not helping... > > Unless I'm looking in the wrong xml... Does anyone know any better? Pedro, something like this should give an idea: $ unzip -p filename.odp styles.xml | xmllint --format - | grep "font-face style:name" | sort -u That will just give style-based font use. For direct formatting, replace "styles.xml" with content.xml. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/How-to-find-out-which-fonts-are-used-in-an-Open-Document-tp4174339p4174431.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Copying formatted text as RTF
I would raise a bug as the clipboard content for text/richtext does indeed appear to be RTF. It appears to have always been this way, based on cursory tests using v3.3.4.1. Referring to bug tdf#40262: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40262 ... it is worth noting that clipboard representations are sometimes internal, although I would think the MIME type should represent an accurate reflection of what to expect. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Copying-formatted-text-as-RTF-tp4173388p4173518.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Navigator / References / Drag Mode: Useless? Deprecated?
The related enhancement is likely: http://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36310. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Navigator-References-Drag-Mode-Useless-Deprecated-tp4138321p4138426.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Daily Master 64bit deb Install Failure
Owen Genat wrote ponsiarceds wrote Package lodevbasis4.4-core05 is always missing. This has been reported as https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82288 Issue is now fixed. All previous coreNN packages have been bundled into a single large core package. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Daily-Master-64bit-deb-Install-Failure-tp4124903p4125398.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Daily Master 64bit deb Install Failure
ponsiarceds wrote Package lodevbasis4.4-core05 is always missing. This has been reported as https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82288 -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Daily-Master-64bit-deb-Install-Failure-tp4124903p4124914.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO 4.3.1 print icon
MR ZenWiz wrote I noticed that in LO Writer 4.3.1, the print icon no longer automatically prints a document but brings up the print window. Yes. Prior releases used the Print File Directly button and in v4.3 this has been replaced with the Print... button. As Valter Mura indicated this can be changed by customising the toolbar i.e., it is the default display that has changed. Decision to change the default was made by the Design team (or a member thereof). Related bug report (and rationale): https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=74455 Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO-4-3-1-print-icon-tp4122204p4122272.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Table presented totally wrong.
Mark Bourne wrote The .docx format changes slightly with each version of MS Office. So do the Microsoft Binary (DOC et al.) formats. Major revisions for DOC were on 2009-07-13, 2010-06-07, 2012-01-20, and 2014-07-31. Mark Bourne wrote For compatibility between MS Office and LibreOffice, the older .doc format is more reliable. Probably only because of the mechanics of this format (it is effectively a memory dump to file). There have been many recent improvements to LO with respect to supporting OOXML. The level of support may not be equal to that for the MS Binary formats (yet) but it hopefully will be in the not-too-distant future. TDF has partner organisations working on these improvements. List of links to recent (2013-2014) blog posts about improvements here: http://en.libreofficeforum.org/node/7505#comment-34131 Mark Bourne wrote From my understanding, Office Open XML (OOXML - the format used in docx, xlsx, and related files) is a supposedly open standard. i.e. anyone can get the details of how to read and write files in that format. But that standard allows some data to be included in an application-specific format, which MS does to make it easier for themselves to port MS Office to using it. Unfortunately that means it's not so easy for anyone else to figure out how to read and write those parts of the file. These compatibility blobs only exist in OOXML Transitional; OOXML Strict essentially eliminates them. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Table-presented-totally-wrong-tp4121993p4122206.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Table presented totally wrong.
Luuk wrote They talk about 'Office 2007', not about the versions after that one The article was written late 2010. MS Office 2010 is mentioned (four times). Luuk wrote The last 2 years of revisions (2nd link) are all No changes to the meaning effectively making the specs old, and making it hard to make a piece of software capable of reading/writing office 2013 documents. [MS-OE376] is a document referencing the standard (EMCA-376 4th Ed. / ISO/IEC 29500:2012 3rd Ed.). It is mainly notes with some examples designed to accompany the specification. Naturally it is not going to change that much as the specification is what contains the technical detail. Unfortunately, none of this is going to assist with the original (or follow-up) query. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Table-presented-totally-wrong-tp4121993p4122207.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Styles Don't Retain Bold?
jmadero wrote Are styles supposed to retain properties like bold. I am consistently getting mixed results using styles. The comments up-thread by Kevin O'Brien and Brian Barker are correct, despite a number of disagreements. So called direct or manual (directly applied) formatting will always override a pre-defined style definition e.g., a character or paragraph style. In LibreOffice direct formatting (which is a Microsoft Office term) is equivalent to any style definition in content.xml, rather than styles.xml (which is where pre-defined styles are stored). I have already commented in the bug report raised by Joel (which has since been closed as NOTABUG), but it seems that this principle of overriding styles is not well understood. Both ISO/IEC 26300 (ODF, Part 1, §16) and ISO/IEC 29500:2012 (OOXML Part 1, §17.7.2) define a hierarchy of application for styles. In both specifications what amounts to directly applied formatting[1] are the last to be applied and so act as an override (which is to be expected, otherwise clicking toolbar formatting buttons AFTER applying a style would have no effect). This can however result in apparently surreptitious behaviour that is at the root of why style adherents tend to loath directly applied formatting i.e., it interfers with the effective application of pre-defined styles. If others would like me to expand on what was occurring in the example document in greater detail for clarity I will. In simple terms there was a direct formatting character definition (style T9 in content.xml) setting both the font style and font weight to normal. This definition was overriding the equivalent settings in any subsequently applied paragraph style definition that used a weight of bold (for example Heading 3). [1] In OOXML these tend to be paragraph or run properties that are not from styles, while in ODF the determination is obtained by following the child-parent chain in style definitions. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Styles-Don-t-Retain-Bold-tp4121727p4122029.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Footnotes
steveedmonds wrote How do I add a footnote when it doesn't have a reference. I have some footnotes with and some without references (anchors). Please clarify, with an example, exactly what is meant by doesn't have a reference and without references (anchors) as this is not clear. Footnotes consist of: - Anchor (identifier in-line in the text, styled by the Footnote Anchor character style). - Identifier (in the footnote area, styled by the Foonote Characters character style). - Text (in the footnote area, styled by the Footnote paragraph style). By way of example, do you mean you have a situation (e.g., natural sciences referencing) where anchors can be specified as 2-4 in the text (i.e., some anchors need to be hidden) but all three footnotes (identifier and text) are shown in the footnote area? If so, this is reported as: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54393 Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Footnotes-tp4121515p4121546.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Errors in (google drive doc - gdoc) -- ( open doc -- odt ) conversion.
Alexandros Prekates wrote Downloading a gdoc document from google drive you will prompted to choose a conversion. Choosing 'open document' i get an odt but i spotted an error in giving 'outline numbering = 10' to even headling styled with headline 1 and superfluous xml in links. I tried to find a way to fix the wrong oultine numbering but noluck. I noticed that in the converted odf file 'oultline levels' 1-6 dont correspont to a heading style instead the relate to nothing. By completing the missing associations in 'tools -- outline numbering' new headings will get the proper ouline level but old ones wont change to correct one leaving only one solution : to delete them and write them back. Under GNU/Linux using v4.3.1.2 opening the provided example and selecting Tools Outline Numbering... Numbering tab associating Level 1 with Heading 1 does make the required change. This does not get around the problem of doing this for numerous heading levels across numerous documents though. Also note that the GoogleDocs ODF filter appears to be writing out ODF v1.1 documents. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Errors-in-google-drive-doc-gdoc-open-doc-odt-conversion-tp4121329p4121366.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Dependency Issues
jmadero wrote I have the 4.3 ppa installed and it's completely broken my package manager. Pastebin link: http://pastebin.com/YLcZsUJT I can't even purge, I get this error: http://pastebin.com/tsG5d7w2 Ubuntu appears to have broken a maintenance script. I think this is the same issue as reported here: http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/38486/ Full solution over on AskUbuntu: http://askubuntu.com/questions/512162/ - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Dependency-Issues-tp4119571p4119581.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Question about kerning and opentype features (ligatures)
Ivan Ivanov wrote Maybe the option Pair Kerning disables the default kerning, but most of the fonts use the GPOS table for kern pairs and that can't be disabled... There is at least one comment in the source code indicating that GPOS kerning is handled by HarfBuzz. GPOS kerning should however only relate to OpenType packaged fonts (either CFF or TTF). - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Question-about-kerning-and-opentype-features-ligatures-tp4119284p4119450.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
TomD wrote The OOXML standard has been through 3 revisions [...] Apparently first put through in 2012. [...] ODF (Open Document Format) [...] has been an ISO since 2006. Apparently it was complete enough first time and has never needed to be revised. This is inaccurate and not a good reflection of what the versions displayed in the linked ISO/IEC list mean. These are the specified editions, and years of publication for each edition, for OOXML: - 1st Ed., ECMA-376:2006 - 2nd Ed., ISO/IEC 29500:2008 and ECMA-376:2008 [1] - 3rd Ed., ISO/IEC 29500:2012 These are the specified editions, and years of publication for each edition, for ODF: - 1st Ed., ISO/IEC 26300:2006 ODF v1.0 and OASIS ODF v1.0 2nd Ed. (2006) [2] - amendment, OASIS ODF v1.1 (2007) and ISO/IEC 26300:2006/Amd 1:2012 ODF v1.1 - 2nd Ed., OASIS ODF v1.2 (2011) yet to be approved by ISO/IEC [3] As the ODF specification grows and becomes more complex[4], it will be revised in similar manner to the OOXML specification. I say this as a staunch advocate of ODF. It is a simple fact of the process that has nothing to do with being complete enough first time. The two main reasons why the OOXML specification is so large are: a) it contains a lot of XML examples and as OOXML is an element rather than attribute-based specification, it requires more lines for each XML example; b) it describes a file format catering for a great many legacy scenarios and objects and is essentially a large, and complex file format. In 20 years time ODF will also likely be more complex, although hopefully never as difficult to comprehend. [1] These two specifications were supposed to be identical, but there was at least one difference that has since been addressed. [2] OASIS ODF v1.0 1st Ed., was specified in 2005, but the amended 2nd Ed., (ISO/IEC version) is the commonly accepted one. [3] When ODF v1.2 is accepted by ISO/IEC it will likely be the 2nd Ed. of ISO/IEC 26300. [4] For example, in order to provide an open and free equivalent to Object Linking and Embedding (OLE), which is currently specified in OASIS ODF v1.2 by reference to Inside OLE by Kraig Brockschmidt, Microsoft Press, 1995. TomD wrote Apparently documents can fully comply with the [OOXML] format even if they contain chunks/blobs that do not conform! It is not clear what you mean here by do not conform. Under the Transitional version of OOXML in the editions listed above, there is provision for legacy (MS Binary file format) compatible blobs. This is why there is a Transitional version i.e., to allow end users to transition to the Strict format. These blobs are supposed to be stripped out (replaced) in OOXML Strict. This is also why ISO/IEC 29500:2012 Strict is the form of OOXML that third parties can more freely implement. In the same manner that the various versions of OOo / AOO / LO have probably implemented parts of the various ODF versions differently, so too do the various versions of MSO implement the various versions of both the MS Binary and OOXML formats differently. Unfortunately there is no getting away from this reality, especially when all the patch releases and hot fixes for products are taken into account - the number of possible product versions becomes very high over time. The developers in each camp are likely trying to do their best to ensure comformance, but as file formats become more complex, more people work on the code base, more real-world use cases are made use of, and a greater number of legacy versions of a product exist, this becomes more challenging over time (as should be expected). TomD wrote Documents must completely comply in order to be considered as complying at all. I generally understand what you mean (a document either complies or it does not), however this is an implementation, rather than specification, issue and is not so simple. A document produced by product A containing the character a may comply, while a more complex document, also produced by product A may be non-compliant. In this case the product is non-compliant, although it CAN produce compliant documents. The degree of compliance of a document written out by an implementation is often not determined until a particular real world use-case is encountered. This is why we have bugtrackers and software is patched in an ongoing manner. To re-iterate, compliance is a perennial struggle. In terms of an implementation of a specification it is generally asymtotically approached and rarely reached. Even LO does not fully comply with ODF v1.2 e.g., bugs like this are not that uncommon: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50950 Bugs can also creep in (in some future release), producing non-compliant documents, and remaining undiscovered until some time later. Catering for these sorts of real-world problems can sometimes be a dilemma. All office suites are in the same situation in this respect. Compliance is difficult to achieve and maintain. Again, I do not state all this as any sort of
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
italovignoli wrote On 10/08/14 03:01, Owen Genat wrote: The Transitional and Strict formats are both defined in ISO/IEC 29500. In ISO/IEC 29500 there is only one transitional definition, while Microsoft has produced three different transitional versions (two without definition, i.e. Transitional 2010 and Transitional 2013) within the same pseudo-standard. I could have been clearer. I was indicating that the Transitional form is defined in the indicated specification, rather than ONLY in the indicated specification. As I indicated in my prior response this form is defined in all three editions of the OOXML specification (both ECMA and ISO/IEC). It is unreasonable to expect an earlier version of any product to write out documents compliant with the latest version of a specification, until the product has been patched to do so. LO is identical in this manner e.g., legacy documents written out non-compliantly using LO v3.x may cause problems in future versions of LO. Reports of this nature come up on Bugzilla. Some cases are easily fixable, some are less easily fixed. italovignoli wrote Transitional, by the way, is not defined as a standard format (because it is incompatible with the Gregorian Calendar, and because it includes proprietary blobs not released within the covenant not to sue). OOXML Strict is a standard ... We are agreed that Transitional is a virtually unimplementable form of the OOXML specification. Both Transitional and Strict are however now enshrined in ISO/IEC so we have to live with this in the same way we are still living with the original Lotus 1-2-3 leap year date error that Microsoft inherited. TDF / LO have decided (freely) to implement support for ISO/IEC 29500 compliant documents so the burden is now on us all to assist as best we can. I say all this with full respect Italo. Hopefully the next versions of MSO will use the Strict form by default, so the transition away from the interrim form can begin in earnest. I am always grateful of the terrific work being done by the developers in this area and assist as I can in the forums and with bug reports. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/What-version-tp4118061p4118573.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
Charles-H. Schulz wrote Quick note in passing. I fail to see how thr discussion on xml standards implementations is of any interest to our users. May I (respectfully) suggest that interested parties bring this conversation to our discuss list? Duly noted. I posted my last response before seeing this message, so apologies if appears I am ignoring you. I am not. Future discussions of this topic I will post to the indicated list. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/What-version-tp4118061p4118575.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
TomD wrote The Doc, Xls, Ppt files all used to have this problem too but now that MS have stopped developing it so much and moved to developing their newer formats it's finally these older formats that ARE good for sharing between different programs. The old MS Binary specifications last had an update of significance (change in technical nature) on 2014-04-30 (XLS) and 2012-01-20 (DOC and PPT). IOW they are still being updated as required. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/What-version-tp4118061p4118457.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
Owen Genat wrote The old MS Binary specifications last had an update of significance (change in technical nature) on 2014-04-30 (XLS) and 2012-01-20 (DOC and PPT). Oops. I am already out of date. The DOC and XLSB specifications had a major update 2014-07-31. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/What-version-tp4118061p4118458.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Too much Politics?
sophi wrote I agree with you, several of the discussions happening here should happen on the discuss@ list ... Sophie, is there some reason why under the Nabble interface the global discuss@ list is not included under the LibreOffice group, whereas most l10n / regional groups do include a discuss@ list? - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Too-much-Politics-tp4118172p4118375.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: What version?
italovignoli wrote OOXML Strict is supported only by MS Office 2013, while all other MS Office incarnations will not open it (and will tell the user that the file is corrupted). This statement is not accurate. ISO/IEC 29500 Strict can be opened / edited by MSO 2010 and opened / edited / saved by MSO 2013 and MSO 365. This was blogged about back in 2012 (where New Office implies MSO 2013 and MSO 365): http://blogs.office.com/2012/08/13/new-file-format-options-in-the-new-office/ The *default* file format used by both MSO 2013 and MSO 365 is ISO/IEC 29500 Transitional. This can be changed to ISO/IEC 29500 Strict if necessary: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/e969fc0a-9fcd-4efe-bf6d-79ea8c34360f/what-is-the-default-file-format-for-saving-in-ms-office-2013-is-it-still-the-transitional-ooxml-or?forum=officeitpro - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/What-version-tp4118061p4118374.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO 4.3.0.4 Crashing
Scott Jones wrote 32-bit System the problem causes LO to crash constantly when starting soffice.exe which is what runs when quickstart.exe is run. Can intermittently get soffice.exe and swriter.exe etc to run. 64-bit System the problem is that I can run soffice.exe seemingly no problem but the quickstart utility doesn't show in the system tray. Neither of these allows quickstart utility to run in the system tray. Related bugs reports: - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80466 - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80927 Best wishes, Owen. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO-4-3-0-4-Crashing-tp4117265p4117401.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?
Pedro wrote The problem is that it is difficult to find a word that explains that one version is new (with new features/bugs/regressions) and the other one has been patched so that new features are already stable. Is this some sort of l10n/i18n issue? I ask because this problem has been solved for many other projects and for a great many years. The process is Development Test Production and these terms are widely respected and understood. Debian uses the variation unstable, testing, stable, and oldstable. I think a term like production should be considered for the more mature series. I agree with NoOp on this issue. The current name choices add nothing of value or clarity. Best wishes, Owen. - Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-Still-tp4117297p4117407.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: status of macro in ODF interoperability?
Charles-H. Schulz wrote On 26 juillet 2014 11:49:10 CEST, Pedro lt; pedlino@ gt; wrote: Maybe it needs more money/time invested? Perhaps. I don't have the numbers but Novell at the time invested in this for something like 4-5 year and put several people on it so it was never exactly a side show either... This 2007 OpenOffice.org presentation seems to indicate the effort mentioned by Charles-H.: http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/conference/presentations/VBA_Macros_-__Interoperability_380.pdf Seems to involve the merging(?) of helperapi from Sun (written in Java for Word/Excel) and oovbaapi from Novell (written in C++ but for Excel only). Presumably Noel Powers would be able to provide greater detail as to what the effort achieved back then. Both tools remain in the source tree and are still seeing updates although to what degree / effect would require a developer to clarify. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/status-of-macro-in-ODF-interoperability-tp4116471p4116807.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: status of macro in ODF interoperability?
M. Fioretti wrote When I wrote this, almost 10 years ago, things didn't looking too good for inter-suite macro compatibility: http://archive09.linux.com/feature/47935 today, I have the feeling thing's haven't really improved, when it comes to macros inserted in ODF files, even considering only the FOSS-based suites, i.e. AOO, LO, Calligra... but I am not sure. What's your opinion, or reports from the trenches? Any feedback is welcome. Michael Meeks (LO developer) has commented about this issue, in relation to the recent UK Government ODF adoption proposal, in his blog post from 2014-02-26 (under the heading Macros expose implementation details): https://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2014-02-26-cabinet-office.html I have also written about this issue in a forum thread here: http://en.libreofficeforum.org/node/7985 In short, a specification (ODF) will never define implementation-level detail (API) and nor should it be expected to do so. Use of macros (API) is effectively a form of implementation (i.e., vendor) lock-on that has little to do with a file format specification. If an organisation is dependent on API-level compatibility, they are dependent on a software product rather than a specification. The situation with ODF or any other file format specification will be unlikely to change this. This is a story that repeats itself in many forms of software and not just office suites and is also the reason why some large organisations prohibit the use of API-level development (as it reduces the ability for adaptation). Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/status-of-macro-in-ODF-interoperability-tp4116471p4116652.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Nitpicking on a name
Charles-H. Schulz wrote On this list (a few others as well but esp. On this one) people call LibreOffice LO. We -sorry to take on my founder's hat here- never called LibreOffice LO. Acronyms / nicknames / shortcuts are rarely at the discretion of the one being named. If the O in LibreOffice had been lowercase, then there /may/ have been a chance to prevent this, but that is long past now. People will shorten it as they can e.g., LO, LibO, LibreO, LOffice, etc. Charles-H. Schulz wrote Now you will tell me that it is easier to type LO than it is with LibreOffice. Perhaps. But everyone here writes MS Office... OOo for OpenOffice.org, AOO for Apache OpenOffice, LO for LibreOffice, MSO for Microsoft Office are all acronyms I use, here on the mailing lists, at the AskLO site, and at the original support forum. Even the source code is filled with lo and LO (e.g., LO4Android) for the same reason. I am not meaning to be antagonistic by stating this, I am just presenting facts. What you are asking is akin to suggesting people refrain from using MS for Microsoft or FB for Facebook. The chance of success would seem improbably low. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Nitpicking-on-a-name-tp4116654p4116673.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: status of macro in ODF interoperability?
Pedro wrote The fact that the VBA is for Windows (and Mac?) is not related to locking people in. VBA is a scripting language shared by all MSO programs to allow automation. I disagree. As my response upthread indicates, a macro language is designed to allow access to an API i.e., an implementation-specific method of manipulation that has nothing to do with interoperability, portability, or file format specifications. Pedro wrote I think you are being an Open Source fundamentalist. Creating and using macros doesn't drag you to the dark side of the force... No. But as Michael Meeks indicated (also linked upthread) it does make interoperability, portability, and transitioning from one product to another /significantly/ more difficult. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/status-of-macro-in-ODF-interoperability-tp4116471p4116757.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: formula years since date
JAMES-2 wrote =YEARS(7/16/2012,TODAY(),1) The literal date needs to be quoted: =YEARS(7/16/2012,TODAY(),1) Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/formula-years-since-date-tp4116088p4116090.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: File corruption on OSX and LO 4252
Alex Thurgood wrote ... file corruption when writing to an external disk drive. ... I have an external FAT formatted LaCie hard drive to store my files on. ... I was working from a USB external hard disk. I would first try to reproduce the error without a USB external storage device being a factor. I cannot recommend working directly from a USB device. Ever. The risk of failure (in all contexts) seems to go up considerably when doing so and I myself have suffered from this (although not with LO). Not an answer I know, and you have my full sympathy and respect Alex, just a possible avenue for further testing. I am not discounting an LO problem as your description sounds similar to this bug: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78260 The example file does open in Writer (displays garbage), but cannot be opened by an archive manager. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/File-corruption-on-OSX-and-LO-4252-tp4115661p4115681.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: [MariaDB Announce] MariaDB Galera Cluster 10.0.12 GA and MariaDB 10.1.0 Alpha now available
NoOp wrote On 07/04/2014 12:37 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) There are a few reasons; * Base needs an external back-end but most new users wont be aware of that Interesting. I never knew that Base needs an external back-end... Perhaps you can get the documentation folks to add that to the help files and the Base docs This will be unlikely to happen in the short term as the so-called split configuration is considered to be for experts only. The idea behind the embedded configuration (i.e., a database back-end inside an ODF container) was developed to mask some of the database back-end detail and for portability. While simpler, the embedded configuration is reported as suffering greater data loss / corruption issues, due to the nature of the packaging. There are numerous threads over on the Apache OO forum about problems with the embedded configuration. There is also a lengthy and detailed discussion about Base / ODF container portability http://en.libreofficeforum.org/node/7876 that provides several links to the mentioned Apache OO forum threads. Summary: In order for a split configuration to become more widespread it would be ideal for some sort of pack-n-go facility to be developed for Base to allow greater portability of data in a manner more in keeping with office documents. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-MariaDB-Announce-MariaDB-Galera-Cluster-10-0-12-GA-and-MariaDB-10-1-0-Alpha-now-available-tp4114577p4114677.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: cannot convert text to number in spreadsheet from csv file
M. Fioretti wrote Summarizing, it seems I need some efficient way to tell Calc, when it opens that file, that all the cells of a certain column, except the header, are NUMBERS, not text, in the -1234.12 format. What Mirosław Zalewski has suggested upthread is essentially correct. The data formats must match the language used (usually the locale) on import. The solutions are to either: (a) edit the data to contain data formats used in the expected language; (b) change the expected language on the Text Import dialogue to match the used data formats. For a numeric format of -100.25 try selecting a Language of English (US) or equivalent on the Text Import dialog. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/cannot-convert-text-to-number-in-spreadsheet-from-csv-file-tp4105787p4105808.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Date format resists conditional format
office76#xt wrote Hi, I have a column of dates in Calc that look like this: 01.07.1986 ... Any way to reformat the Date column into some Date format that would allow conditional formatting as just described? Any ideas welcome. Given 01.07.1986 in cell A1 these entries in the indicated cells will give you a valid date: - in B1 =LEFT(A1;SEARCH([0-9]\.;A1)) will return the day 01. - in C1 =RIGHT(A1;LEN(A1)-SEARCH(\.;A1)) will return the remaining data 07.1986. - in D1 =LEFT(C1;SEARCH([0-9]\.;C1)) will return the month 07. - in E1 =RIGHT(C1;LEN(C1)-SEARCH(\.;C1)) will return the year 1986. - in F1 =DATE(E1;D1;B1) will provide a valid date, which can be formatted as required. You can then copy column F data over column A (paste special Selection of Date time) and delete the other (now unnecessary) columns as required. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Date-format-resists-conditional-format-tp4105794p4105811.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: ePub format
TomD wrote https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/EPUB I dunno why people insist on using all capitals or putting spaces into urls but i've had trouble in the past with trying to get a consistent naming convention sorted out and it's led to duplicates needing to be merged. Thanks for the link. You have my sympathy, but in this case the specification / file format is referred to as EPUB and not ePub. I am not sure why the EPUB logo is displayed ePUB, especially given it states on the terms of use http://idpf.org/legal/terms-of-use page EPUB is a registered trademark of the IDPF. The apparently absent License Policy may contain further details. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ePub-format-tp4104665p4105040.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Intentionally crashing LibreOffice when frozen/LibreOffice will not start.
andrewH wrote I am working with a data set that keeps causing my LibreOffice to freeze. I am pretty sure that this is only because it is big. It is a pipe-separated text from the US Economic Census imported into Calc, about 30 columns and around a million rows. (The actual data set is bigger, but Calc quits at a million-odd. The complete file is about 0.8 gig.) I suspect but can not prove that this is related to file handling somehow, e.g. breaking down during auto-saving. [...] Because no LibreOffice process seemed to be using much CPU time, I assumed that it was again frozen rather than still working (though soffice.bin *32 still had 1.14 gig in memory) and hit the finish button. [...] I am running LibreOffice 4.2 on Windows 7 64-bit with SP1, on a Dell i5 machine with 24 gig of RAM. I do not recall there being a separate 64-bit version, but the installer put it in my 64-bit programs directory. There is only a 32 bit version of LO for Windows, so that is not an issue. It sounds to me as though the input filter is choking on the amount of data to be read. The RAM usage figures are smaller than I would expect for that amount of file data, although if it is uncompressed then it is less surprising cf. with my testing in this http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/29766/what-is-the-filesize-limit-on-a-calc-file/?answer=29841#post-id-29841 AskLO answer. I have pushed Calc v4.2 even higher on occasion. If it is a public dataset can you post a link for others to test? Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Intentionally-crashing-LibreOffice-when-frozen-LibreOffice-will-not-start-tp4104156p4104164.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO4.2 pdf export embeds all fonts...
krackedpress wrote On 03/24/2014 12:25 PM, Pedro wrote: Owen Genat wrote The 14 standard PostScript fonts are now (under v4.2+) always embedded, as required by PDF v1.5. I provide some detail here: http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/30069/pdf-font-embedding-in-libreoffice-42/?answer=30071#post-id-30071 This may be contributing to the observed behaviour, although to what degree this change affects font substitution, I am uncertain. That would be acceptable if the file was exported as PDF 1.5 but since it is exported as PDF 1.4 the change doesn't make any sense. I Embed fonts all the time for viewing to other systems. ... I use a lot of specialty fonts, like that, in some of my work. They are needed to be embedded into the files, PDF or otherwise, so the people who get them can see the text with the proper formatting and fonts. ... I do not know about the 14 standard Postscript fonts, since I do not know what those fonts are These are two completely different options (as I indicate in the AskLO thread I linked). The 14 fonts relate to the PDF standard (even v1.4, although the reference in the change is to v1.5) and include: ... four faces each of three Latin text typefaces (Courier, Helvetica*, and Times*), as well as two symbolic fonts (Symbol and ITC Zapf Dingbats®). The option under File Properties... Font tab is for user-specified font embedding. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO4-2-pdf-export-embeds-all-fonts-tp4098983p4103154.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: printing docs with comments?
Rogier F. van Vlissingen wrote Thanks, but I guess there's no way to print them parallel to the text as I can in MSWord? This is an old enhancement request: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36815 There are some good mockups in the related Design Whiteboard page (refer links). Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/printing-docs-with-comments-tp3960005p4103256.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Clarification about ODF Extended
Tanstaafl wrote On 3/20/2014 5:28 PM, e-letter lt; inpost@ gt; wrote: Thank you. It is a worry that 17 out of 24 features are in fact devoted to interoperability with m$. Nope, not a worry at all. Compatibility with the office product that holds the vast majority of the market share is a decent objective. In fact, there is even an ODF / OOXML Translation Guidelines standard (ISO/IEC TR 29166) to further clarify the issue. This is another standard that also may need updating once the final less-clear parts of OOXML are worked out by ISO/IEC JTC 1, SC 34. General comment: While this thread appears to have taken on a life of its own with respect to compliance and validation (which are not the same) the comment by T. Behrens in bug fdo#30711 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30711#c3 is worth reading. Of particular interest is the reference to ODF-Next. This is an expression used to generally refer to the version of the standard that is under development (but never actually arrives, it rolls over). The term is widely used within OASIS. In standards terms it is a mirroring of the train development model used by LO i.e., a past, present, and future version at any one time. This is what I meant up-thread when I stated that ODF development needs to be practical (based on real-world use cases) and community-driven i.e., adapted to cater for unforseen use cases by people who are creating documents or even matters that were not thought of in the original spcification. Even so, I can understand the concern that ODF v1.2 Extended is not an ISO/IEC standard. I guess all that can be said by way of reassurance is to re-iterate what Italo and Mark Bourne have each indicated: the extra bits will not affect either validation or compatibility as they will be ignored. TomD wrote How about trying to get involved with OASIS to see if any of the critical assumptions have any basis in reality? Thanks for bringing this up. All these standards organisations, including ISO/IEC and OASIS, rely on volunteered time. There is a mis-conception that because the voting rights list reads like the Fortune 500 that hundreds of paid professionals are tirelessly working away. That is really only part of the story. As with any free / open source / community venture issues are often left to languish unless someone takes an interest. I recently enquired of OASIS whether a proposal for a new chart type (box plot) had moved along, as there was little detail in the related OASIS issue. The response was an invitation to become more involved by writing up the required technical proposal, which is exactly as it should be. I am still hopeful I can. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4102482.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Inserting DRAW file as linked OLE in WRITER file?
Mucip wrote I came to decision that It's not good way to use OLE in my situation. :( In my opinion OLE logic is not rock solid yet. Unfortunately OLE is one area that has no equivalent in ODF (v1.2 of the specification references the 1995 work Inside OLE by Kraig Brockschmidt). In fact OLE is a massively complex design that appears to do what it does (hand off a foreign blob of content for external editing and receive an updated foreign blob back) deceptively well. Use of OLE will likely remain potentially problematic for interoperability until the OLE data structure spec ( MS-OLEDS http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd942265.aspx ) is listed in the Open Specification Promise http://www.microsoft.com/openspecifications/en/us/programs/osp/default.aspx . Even then there will likely be people unhappy about using this technology. Mucip wrote I think it's the best way for me that inset (not linked!) pictures in DRAW and put arrows, leaders on it and than making group and copy/paste to WRITER unfortunately... You could still use linked graphics, but perhaps try and link to a PNG exported from the Draw file. This way you can maintain the location (in the file system) of the images and update a given image (or many) in Draw, while leaving the graphics linked in Writer. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Inserting-DRAW-file-as-linked-OLE-in-WRITER-file-tp4102082p4102484.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Clarification about ODF Extended
italovignoli wrote Somewhere in the wiki there is a list of the extended features ... For those interested, these can be found in the ODF Implementor Notes https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/ODF_Implementer_Notes#LibreOffice_ODF_extensions . Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4102145.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Inserting DRAW file as linked OLE in WRITER file?
Mucip wrote I import this DRAW file as linked OLE object. But I can not center the picture in OLE container/frame? When I adjust it once than it may change later?! I can not fix the main picture region of the DRAW object in OLE container/frame? You will need to rescale the ODG prior to inserting it as an OLE object into the Writer document. There are some limits on how large the Draw canvas can be before it is rescaled when imported via OLE. Refer my explanation http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/2/size-of-odg-inserted-via-ole-in-odt/?answer=24459#post-id-24459 on AskLO. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Inserting-DRAW-file-as-linked-OLE-in-WRITER-file-tp4102082p4102243.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: ODF 1.x vs 1.2
TomD wrote Presumably it can be done straight from a command-line without even needing a script as such. This is an ideal task for a script. Invoking LO to determine ODF version info is inefficient, especially for multiple files. Here is a basic bash script to do the task under GNU/Linux: #!/bin/bash # extract office:version attribute i.e., ODF version # args: $1 path to search e.g., doc/ # $2 file extension e.g., sxw odt od* for f in $1*.$2; do v=$(unzip -p $f content.xml | xmllint --format - | grep -o office:version=[^\]* | sed -e 's/office:version=//' -e 's///g'); echo $f: $v; done; -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ODF-1-x-vs-1-2-tp4101348p4101478.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Jim Seymour wrote Pedro wrote: So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :) OASIS establishes the standards, no? If such is the case: What you've written, above, is what we call putting the cart before the horse. And that's putting the best possible light on it. This is not how the ODF standard is developed. As Italo has indicated it happens slowly over a long time, and there are various reasons for this. There is a statement on the OASIS website (which unfortunately I cannot find at present) which indicates that in order for a new feature to be included in ODF-Next by OASIS, it must first be implemented in a few different pieces of software e.g., Apache OO, LO, and AbiWord (2+ or 3+ implementations from memory). ODF needs to be practical (based on real-world use cases) and community-driven rather than a theoretical specification developed in isolation by a chosen few. TomD wrote LibreOffice does use the ODF 1.2 and that did become an ISO standard a couple of years ago. No. The information provided by Italo up-thread is correct: italovignoli wrote ... ODF 1.2 which is in the process of becoming an ISO standard (backward compatible with ODF 1.0). Standard definitions, by their own nature, are moving slowly. Details on milestones in the ISO/IEC approval process here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_standardization#OpenDocument_1.2 . Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101650.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Date Patterns
A wrote Can anyone tell me how I can get the following date pattern in my (writer) document? 15th day of March, 2014 As this https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7t=65620 Apache OO forum thread indicates, ordinal suffixes are not supported in date fields. A format code of: D day of MMM, ... will give you the other elements. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Date-Patterns-tp4101649p4101651.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO4.2 pdf export embeds all fonts...
r_ouellette wrote ... now LO4.2 seems to ALWAYS embed all fonts, even if I don't want this behavior. I would prefer to have an option not to embed all fonts to revert to the pre 4.2 behavior. Maybe this option is possible in the advanced settings, but I didn't find it. The 14 standard PostScript fonts are now (under v4.2+) always embedded, as required by PDF v1.5. I provide some detail here: http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/30069/pdf-font-embedding-in-libreoffice-42/?answer=30071#post-id-30071 This may be contributing to the observed behaviour, although to what degree this change affects font substitution, I am uncertain. Regards, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LO4-2-pdf-export-embeds-all-fonts-tp4098983p4099513.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: status of Microsoft Office compliance with ODF support?
Jay Lozier wrote MSO 2010 and earlier did not support ODF 1.2 only ODF 1.1. I saw somewhere that ODF 1.2 is supported in MSO 2013/Office 365. The official statement was made on the MS Office blog in August 2012: http://blogs.office.com/2012/08/13/new-file-format-options-in-the-new-office/ The New Office referred to is MS Office 2013. ODF v1.1 can be opened, edited, and saved under MS Office 2007 + Service Pack 2 and MS Office 2010. This format can also be opened and edited under MS Office 2013. ODF v1.2 can only be opened, edited, and saved under MS Office 2013. The current ODF v1.2 Extended (to be ODF v1.3) is not supported. I am unaware to what degree subsequent corrections to the ODF specification (v1.1 and v1.2) by OASIS have been implemented by Microsoft. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/status-of-Microsoft-Office-compliance-with-ODF-support-tp4097206p4097304.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Problems between LO and CUPS
Malcolm Moore wrote LO connects to CUPS on start not when you want to print. So if you have LO open for a while the connection to CUPS will time out. You need to set your CUPS timeout short enough so that it will time out eventually but long enough so that CUPS doesn't drop the connection in normal use. This is bug fdo#56344 which appears to have been resolved in CUPS v1.7.0: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56344 The problem as originally reported in this Users mailing list thread /may/ be related. If it is, then upgrading to a newer CUPS version will be required as the problem was not with LO. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Problems-between-LO-and-CUPS-tp4097212p4097305.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Export PDF
Cliff Scott-2 wrote I've run into a strange occurrence in LO 4.1.4. Everytime I export to PDF I get a error message that PDF/A-1a forbids a transparency. Clicking OK allows the export to continue and I don't see any problems in the resultant PDF, but this is something I've only seen on 4.1.4. This happens with Writer and Calc. FYI, I'm running OSx Mavericks. Is this a known problem? Yes. It started occurring in the v3.6 series. I reported it here: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65439 It appears to be a default warning for PDF/A-1a that needs to be amended either for improved contextualisation or to make it clearer exactly why the warning is being shown. It is a minor issue and there is no clear indication (yet) on which is the preferred option. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Export-PDF-tp4096262p4096291.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Writer printing problem
krackedpress wrote So why do I reproduce the issue on Ubuntu 12.04LTS OS with the 64-bit 4.1.4.2 version [build - Build ID: 0a0440ccc0227ad9829de5f46be37cfb6edcf72], but your Debian 7.3.0 OS does not reproduce it? That is weird. Could there be some OS variant involved here? Same DEB version of LO but different Debian based OSs reproduce it differently? Owen, could there be that much difference with the two Debian based OSs to cause the different reproduction of the issue, yes on mine and no on yours? Yes, this behaviour is odd, but not unheard of, even between two relatively close flavours of GNU/Linux. There are a lot of packages in linux and it would probably take someone more well versed in the intricacies of the printing sub-system than I to determine what might be an influencing factor. Under Windows it could be something as simple as not entering the user name (to preserve cursor position), although that is a guess on my part. krackedpress wrote I run Ubuntu 12.04LTS with MATE [1.6.0] as the default desktop environment. Which d.e. are you using for your Debian OS? I am currently running LXDE (as a trial) with several parts hacked out and others grafted in (the relationship is not going well). FWIW I get the same result under Crunchbang 11 x86_64 (basically Debian v7.x + Openbox) using v4.2.0.4 Build ID: 05dceb5d363845f2cf968344d7adab8dcfb2ba71. Position remains set at the cursor, before and after printing. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Writer-printing-problem-tp4095315p4095667.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Writer printing problem
Joe Alders wrote After a very disappointing experience using the LibreOffice Forum at the 'ask' part of the LibreOffice site, I will try this forum for help. This is the related AskLO thread: http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/28581/document-in-writer-always-jumps-to-first-page-after-printing-command/ I sympathise with your plight Joe, but it is incredibly difficult to troubleshoot printing problems as there is a lot more than just LO involved. It is important when asking questions on AskLO to provide as much detail as possible i.e., for a printing-related issue, the printer make/model, the driver being used, whether the printer is local or on a network (and if network, the protocol), the printer language (PDF or PostScript), and so on. This helps others attempt to reproduce / narrow down the issue. I can't reproduce the issue here under Debian v7.3.0 x86_64 using v4.1.4.2 Build ID: 0a0440ccc0227ad9829de5f46be37cfb6edcf72 when printing to a HP LaserJet 4050TN via CUPS v1.5.3 (IPP connection) using Printer Language Type of either PDF or PostScript (from driver). There are reports in this thread of it working as expected for MacOS+LOv4204, WinXPSP3+LOv4142, and in the AskLO thread for Win7x64+LOv4152, but nothing exactly matching your setup of Win7x64+LOv4142 (and no printer details are offered by anyone). The report in this thread of a similar issue for Ubuntu+LOv4142 does not indicate the source of LO, but it is possibly PPA, so difficult to reconcile with behaviour of website-sourced copies. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Writer-printing-problem-tp4095315p4095560.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: 4.3 Writer Beta Breaks Alternate Search Extension
CVAlkan wrote How does this get reported to the developers? The best way is to raise a bug: https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/ Set the component to Extension and include as much detail about the issue as you can. A second party (experiencing the same issue) can then confirm the report. Joel recently made a call out to users for exactly this type of testing of advanced versions (i.e., v4.3), so thanks for finding this problem. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/4-3-Writer-Beta-Breaks-Alternate-Search-Extension-tp4094238p4094262.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: font is not available and will be substituted
edo1 wrote The LO replacement table Tools Options LibreOffice Fonts doesn't help, as it can't replace fonts one doesn't have. This is /exactly/ the purpose of this replacement table i.e., it lets you take control of which font you would like to see substituted for Garamond (the missing font). For example, I can create an entry: Font: GaramondABC Replace with: GaramondXYZ Neither is a font I have, but should I ever receive a document containing a font named GaramondABC I will know for certain it is being replaced with GaramondXYZ. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/font-is-not-available-and-will-be-substituted-tp4094214p4094263.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: low traffic lately?
CVAlkan wrote I've tried using AskLO several times and have never figured out how to set up an account, ... ... all I see are ways to sign in using Google or Facebook and so forth, and I don't have any of those accounts This thread has become hijacked by several comments about requiring a Facebook or Twitter or social media account to use the AskLO site. I am responding to this comment simply because it is the first, but am not wanting to single anyone out. Hopefully I can provide some useful information. There are threads on AskLO about various aspects of this very issue: http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/21348/can-the-interface-for-registering-at-asklo-be-improved/ http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/11140/how-can-we-encourage-more-people-to-sign-in-to-the-ask-site/ http://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/24838/registration-at-libo-after-opendid-stops/ To be clear, what is required to sign in to AskLO is an OpenID verified domain. This can be any such verified site, including a personal site if anyone cares to setup OpenID verification for themselves (I have not tested this, and comment in one of the listed threads that if this does not work a bug needs to be raised). The point here is that if anyone wants to take control of their own verification, they are free to do so. There are a *lot* of OpenID providers. Click the OpenID badge and enter the URL of a provider. All the major social media service providers use this type of verification and this is expected. LO as a project will naturally attempt to make use of such types of media (e.g., by tweeting and facebooking) as that is where a lot of people are these days. It is however unlikely that email will completely die, but it now has competing channels it never had in years past. The web is diversifying and fragmenting as it grows and this too is completely natural. The hope is that LO itself will become an OpenID provider so that a single LO account will allow sign-in to all the OpenID-supported services that LO makes use of (nabble, gerrit, AskBot, wiki, etc.) and will enhance those that do not currently support OpenID to do so e.g., bugzilla. LO is a big project with a lot of different services and sites so this make sense IMO. There is also the alternate forum (http://en.libreofficeforum.org/forum/) that has a local registration. Disclosure: I am a moderator there. Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/low-traffic-lately-tp4093796p4094013.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Index Quirks in Writer
CVAlkan wrote Here's an experiment you can do: Open a new document using whatever standard size is in effect. At the top of the document, type dt and press F3. This generates the dummy text. In a separate text editor create a concordance file with the following entries: Breeze;Breeze;;;0;0 Long;Long;;;0;0 Self;Self;;;0;0 Wrist;Wrist;;;0;0 Back in the document, create a new index at the bottom of the page, and mark Case Sensitive. Then choose the concordance file created above. You'll see that the words himself and along are marked in the document and included in the index as Self and Long, even though these words never appear in the text. Now add the following entry to the concordance file: Eat;Eat;;;0;0 Find it? It actually marked the last three letters of the word sweat which doesn't match the case. This is due to the 0;0 at the end of each entry. These two options represent Match case;Word only. CVAlkan wrote How do I get rid of the index markers? Going through one by one is far too tedious. Right-click on the index Edit Index/Table... Index/Table tab Options section pull down the concordance list and selection Edit... and then you can check case and word only entries as required. Clicking OK/OK, should immediately update the document. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Index-Quirks-in-Writer-tp4093936p4093963.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: having 2525 defined colors to choose from within LO
krackedpress wrote I did not go through all of the 2525 color lines, and many of those lines were given to me, as is, like the Crayola colors. Some duplicates may be in color sequences, so they need to stay. Some are not and can be removed. Some non-working colors will be fixed or removed [as the case with the colors I was given]. Some of the colors only have a hex code for their names, since those colors are a sequence of color shading and did not have names assigned to them. I feel that just calling them things like red hue 15 shading 3 would not be any good, since it would be a made up name. Yes, all of the names have been made up, but I will not create names for these colors, like rosemary pink or coral sea foam green. How paint companies come up with these color names is a mystery to me. Of course, some say there are too many colors to choose from. Some would like more colors. I was thinking about looking into more colors and their shading towards white. The red hues need to be found and the shadings. Maybe some of the named colors could be placed in hue order instead of alphabetical order. There are several things that bother me about a single large Franken-palette of this nature. - Swatches are generally not in visual (gamut) order, which they need to be for ease-of-use. - They are rarely designed for the current 8-column (v3.x - v4.1) or upcoming 12-column (v4.2+) colour picker in LO. - Combining several palettes into a single file defeats the entire point of a palette, which is to /restrict/ the number of available swatches. - This particular example includes proprietary (Pantone) details, which is especially of concern. The matter of including Pantone palettes in other free / open products such as Scribus, GIMP, and Inkscape, is a long running and ultimately pointless initiative. In honesty, we as a community should be aiming to create our own libre palettes, with an arrangement of hues and tones that are suitable for the colour picker. There are a few attempts by others available on the net, but I will see what I can come up with. The problem of naming hues and tones is always a serious challenge. I tend to prefer CMYK, RGB, HSL, or similar types of codes over generic names, such as Antique White 1, although I can understand the desire for this type of subjective naming. Kind regards, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/having-2525-defined-colors-to-choose-from-within-LO-tp4092930p4093585.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Too many choices - not only colors
Milos Sramek wrote For me, there are too many colors to choose from. I am lost in the (for me too large) table of colors. For example, I do not know how to choose a color, which is the same as some text elsewhere. It is even not possible to compare the colors visually (color perception depends on neighborhood). So I have to try several times to hit the right one. I even filed a bug on this back in the OOO times. Nothing has happened, so I found my way how to choose colors. However, in LO42 there is a new color table. A nice one, with sorted colors. For me it is completely useless. I tend to agree in that colours in a palette need to be at least approximately in gamut order to allow meaningful selection. The problem you describe though is not about the number of colours, or palettes, but rather the ability to match an existing colour. Milos Sramek wrote I thing that common users like me need something very simple: a list of colors used in the document, the last (used or picked) color, and a more button). These enhancement reports go some way toward addressing these issues: - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44366 - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64453 - https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67995 King regards, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Too-many-choices-not-only-colors-tp4093054p4093586.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
