Created attachment 169090 [details] Unmodified file created by LibreOffice This bug is also present in 6.4.7. Steps to reproduce: 1. Create a new file with a footnote. 2. Add a cross-reference to the footnote: first its page number, then the footnote's number. 3. Save to DOCX. 4. Close and reopen. Result: The reference to the footnote's number disappeared. I investigated a little the DOCX archive. Here is the culprit in word/document.xml: <w:bookmarkStart w:id="0" w:name="_RefF0"/> <w:bookmarkStart w:id="1" w:name="_RefF0"/> <w:bookmarkEnd w:id="1"/> <w:r> <w:rPr> <w:rStyle w:val="Ancredenotedebasdepage"/> </w:rPr> <w:footnoteReference w:id="2"/> </w:r> There is no <w:bookmarkEnd w:id="0"/> in any file in the archive and both bookmarks have the same name. I suppose that we should have something like this instead: <w:bookmarkStart w:id="1" w:name="fnRef"/> <w:r> <w:rPr> <w:rStyle w:val="Ancredenotedebasdepage"/> </w:rPr> <w:footnoteReference w:id="2"/> </w:r> <w:bookmarkEnd w:id="1"/> where the bookmark elements with w:id="0" would be placed in word/footnotes.xml (at least it is what I observed in a document produced by Word 2010). Additionally, the footnote reference is called by: <w:instrText> REF _RefF0 \h </w:instrText> We should have (provided that we changed the w:name attribute): <w:instrText> NOTEREF fnRef \h </w:instrText> These are only hints, and I may be mistaken at some points. I produced a modified version of the file with the fixes mentioned above. When I open it in Word 2010, it complains that it is corrupt, but if I force opening, it basically works. References are here and can be updated correctly if I modify the file.
Created attachment 169091 [details] File including the manual fixes described in the bug report
Bastien, thank your for reporting the bug. Please add the original odt-file before saving to as docx-file. Thank you. => NEEDNFO
Created attachment 169524 [details] Same file as ODT
(In reply to Dieter from comment #2) > Bastien, thank your for reporting the bug. Please add the original odt-file > before saving to as docx-file. Thank you. > => NEEDNFO Hi, here it is. More precisely, I wrote a new identical file that I saved in odt before exporting it to docx (with the same results). Thank you for investigating it!
I confirm it with Version: 7.2.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 396c2ad2daad6fe6a11703d0ae1593929834afe2 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19042; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-GB Calc: threaded Steps to reproduce 1. Open attachment 169524 [details] 2. Save as docx 3. Close and reopen Actual result: Cross reference to footnote disappears.
repro Version: 7.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 7ac19fbce8a35f559eebb879cd0f232bfc95e703 CPU threads: 8; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19043; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: da-DK (da_DK); UI: en-US Calc: CL
Already the case in LO 3.3 when DOCX export first appeared. Field text disappears after a field update.
Dear Bastien Dumont, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
The bug is still present in: Version: 26.2.1.2 (X86_64) Build ID: 620(Build:2) CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 6.19; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: fr-FR (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US 26.2.1-1 Calc: threaded The bug was already present in 3.3.
Still repro in 26.8 after bug 148294 was fixed. I don't know much about bookmarks or cross-references, but we seem to export all cross-references as bookmarks, and never import a bookmark into a cross-reference [at least that is my assumption]. A bookmark of a footnote marker doesn't actually have any 'text'. So both Word and Writer will treat a normal reference to bookmarked footnote markers as an 'empty string'. [If you think otherwise, select the reference field and then update it with F9] IIUC, a normal 'Ref' field accesses the bookmark 'text'. So Bastien seem to be absolutely correct in the assessment that this field should be exported as a NoteRef instead of as a plain Ref. So, I used MS Word to create a test document with NOTEREF fields. While they round-trip in LO, they seem to just be preserved, because I couldn't F9 update them. (In fact, I can't even see that they are fields in LO.) So it seems like a lot of 'fundamentals' need to be implemented first before this bug report can be handled. Namely, DOCX import needs to import these as functional cross-references.