| Summary: | VIEWING: chart:include-hidden-cells attribute appears to be ignored when references are external | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | LibreOffice | Reporter: | Owen Genat (retired) <owen.genat> |
| Component: | Chart | Assignee: | Not Assigned <libreoffice-bugs> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | jmadero.dev, markus.mohrhard, robinson.libreoffice |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | Inherited From OOo | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | Linux (All) | ||
| See Also: | https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3852 | ||
| Whiteboard: | BSA odf | ||
| Crash report or crash signature: | Regression By: | ||
| Attachments: | Two ODS with charts showing references to hidden cell data (local and external). | ||
|
Description
Owen Genat (retired)
2013-12-08 00:47:49 UTC
moggi - Could you provide insight into whether this is a bug (or at least an implementation detail we might seek to change) ? Thanks (In reply to comment #1) > moggi - Could you provide insight into whether this is a bug (or at least an > implementation detail we might seek to change) ? > > Thanks It is an implementation detail. For external files we loose the information which cells are hidden and fixing that is not trivial. I'm actually unsure if it would be desired because this would have some consequences outside of charts that would introduce regressions. (In reply to comment #2) > It is an implementation detail. For external files we loose the information > which cells are hidden and fixing that is not trivial. I'm actually unsure > if it would be desired because this would have some consequences outside of > charts that would introduce regressions. Thanks for the clarification. I suspected the information might be getting lost. I mainly wanted to get some clarity on this issue, particularly in relation to the ODF spec. Perhaps ODF v1.3 may need to have this section amended to more clearly indicate that only local references are covered? I can't find a corresponding OASIS issue so I will raise this matter on the OASIS office-comment mailing list. (In reply to comment #3) > > Perhaps ODF v1.3 may need to have this section amended to more clearly > indicate that only local references are covered? I can't find a > corresponding OASIS issue so I will raise this matter on the OASIS > office-comment mailing list. Sounds like this is not a "non-issue," so I'll toss it into 'NEW' for now. OASIS (JIRA) issue link added to See Also list. (In reply to comment #5) > OASIS (JIRA) issue link added to See Also list. I never said that it is limited to local references. I actually know that it is not but we don't support it for external ones and I don't see us support it in the near future. You can write much on a piece of paper but efficient implementations require sometimes to make compromises and not implementing that for external references is one. (In reply to comment #6) > I never said that it is limited to local references. I actually know that it > is not but we don't support it for external ones and I don't see us support > it in the near future. I did not mean to imply you had indicated anything to me about how it is implemented. The words (in the OASIS email list message) are purely my own, so I apologise if they are inaccurate. > You can write much on a piece of paper but efficient implementations require > sometimes to make compromises and not implementing that for external > references is one. Understood. From my perspective I am not trying to push this bug (or the OASIS issue) to get a fix but more to allow all parties a chance to comment so that the matter can be documented. The only comment so far in the OASIS issue indicates it is possible no existing ODF implementation caters for external references to hidden cells, possibly for the reasons indicated here. I am perfectly happy for this report to be RESOLVED (should it be set to WONTFIX?) as I think the reasons for the current implementation have been fairly clearly stated. Thanks Markus. (In reply to comment #7) > > I am perfectly happy for this report to be RESOLVED (should it be set to > WONTFIX?) as I think the reasons for the current implementation have been > fairly clearly stated. Thanks Markus. Moggi - I'll leave resolution of this bug up to you. If you think that it's something worth keeping open but low on our radar, or if you think we should RESOLVE it right now, either one sounds fine to me. Thanks We can re-open this discussion in the future if we see users bumping up against this issue as a limitation. For now, changing status to 'RESOLVED WONTFIX'. Migrating Whiteboard tags to Keywords: (NeedAdvice) [NinjaEdit] 'needsConfirmationAdvice' is only used for unconfirmed bugs. Removing it from this bug. [NinjaEdit] |