Created attachment 136448 [details]
If you open an xls/xslx file that has wrapped text in a cell, it will not look the same in Calc as it does in Excel, as Calc renders the text with single line spacing and Excel renders it with 1.12 line spacing. Similarly, if you open an ods from LO in Excel, it also will look different as Excel will expand the height of the row to fit the 1.12 line spacing it uses.
@Eike: any thoughts on what can be done about this interoperability issue?
Created attachment 136449 [details]
Excel 2003 vs Calc
Build ID: 7315f325ff7ada3d6bd85a471058fdaeaff8cdb0
CPU threads: 2; OS: Linux 4.4; UI render: default; VCL: gtk2;
TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@70-TDF, Branch:master, Time: 2017-09-17_06:58:21
Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); Calc: group
Guess adding support for a line height scaling multiplier as for bug 108555 would allow setting a default other than the 100% line height, as Thomas was suggesting in bug 112497.
Do need to check Excel 2013 and 2016 for the line spacing (is it 108% as in Word's normal.dotm for those releases)?
Otherwise selecting 115% (or 108%) to match the MS Office wrapped line spacing might also lend some consistency to our UI.
We had added LLINESPACE_115 at 5.3 as a drop list item available for paragraph line spacing (bug 85949). And we were discussing 115% as a replacement default for the Text Body paragraph style, currently at 120% (bug 94464). If used for the wrapped line spacing by Excel 2013-2016 we could shift all of LO use to 108%--better interoperability and some would be happier with the spacing aesthetics.
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #2)
> Do need to check Excel 2013 and 2016 for the line spacing (is it 108% as in
> Word's normal.dotm for those releases)?
I tested excel 2003, 2007, 2010, and 2013 and they all use the 1.12, so its not related to the line spacing changes that have been happening in word.