Description: Previously, if I had the following outline numbering paras: 1. (a) — and then inserted a cross-reference to (a) using ‘Number (full context)’, Writer would insert: 1(a) Since upgrading to 7.3.7.2, it now inserts: 1.(a) Steps to Reproduce: 1. Insert two levels of outline numbered paragraphs where the first level has a period [.] following the paragraph number. 2. Insert a cross-reference to the second level using ‘Number (full context)’. NOTE: The unwanted behaviour does not occur if you insert a cross-reference to the first level. I.e. it will insert just ‘1’ without a period [.] following. Actual Results: 1.(a) Expected Results: 1(a) Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Version: 7.3.7.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 30(Build:2) CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.15; UI render: default; VCL: x11 Locale: en-AU (en_AU.UTF-8); UI: en-US Ubuntu package version: 1:7.3.7-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 Calc: threaded This behaviour started after I upgraded from 6.[?] to 7.3.7.2. I posted about this here: https://ask.libreoffice.org/t/unwanted-change-to-cross-referencing-numbering-convention/87797 One comment said: This is the result of https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/117156. And please file this as a bug (about broken backward compatibility). It is related to https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=144563.
Created attachment 185418 [details] Example
I tried it on 7.4.5.1 in a Windows VirtualBox installation. Same problem. See second attachment: ‘Example Windows’. Version: 7.4.5.1 (x86) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 9c0871452b3918c1019dde9bfac75448afc4b57f CPU threads: 2; OS: Windows 6.1 Service Pack 1 Build 7601; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: en-US (en_US); UI: en-GB Calc: threaded
Created attachment 185419 [details] Example Windows
Comment on attachment 185419 [details] Example Windows I tried it on 7.4.5.1 in a Windows VirtualBox installation. Same problem. See second attachment: ‘Example Windows’. Version: 7.4.5.1 (x86) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 9c0871452b3918c1019dde9bfac75448afc4b57f CPU threads: 2; OS: Windows 6.1 Service Pack 1 Build 7601; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: en-US (en_US); UI: en-GB Calc: threaded
Vasily, you've worked on bug 144563, so I assume, you can assess, if current behaviour is a bug or not cc: Vasily Melenchuk
Back in 7.1, the dot was not included: Version: 7.1.0.3 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: f6099ecf3d29644b5008cc8f48f42f4a40986e4c CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.15; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-AU (en_AU.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded But back then, the behaviour was very inconsistent: - only "before" character: kept - only "after" character: stripped - both "before" and "after" characters: both kept Since 7.2, all "before" and "after" characters are kept: Version: 7.2.7.2 / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 8d71d29d553c0f7dcbfa38fbfda25ee34cce99a2 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.15; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-AU (en_AU.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded That was introduced by https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/117156, which mentions: "changed cross-references values to lists: they are now including full list label string" However, the fix for bug 144563 restores the stripping of the final dot since 7.3.3 and 7.4.0 for MS Word compatibility reasons, but only when the full reference ends with it. E.g. "1." becomes "1", but "1.(a)" stays the same (as you've noticed already). In my opinion, keeping all characters is more consistent. Why should the dot be stripped but not the parentheses? But I can understand the appeal of having the option to strip them or not, which could be done as described in bug 149635#c11 Also adding Heiko to CC, as he participated in related discussions.
Duplicate of bug 149635?
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #7) > Duplicate of bug 149635? I'd say so. Andrew, would you agree such feature would fix your problem? *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 149635 ***
Yes, I think that something like the suggestions in bug 149635 would work. But I add that, given that this worked a particular way for a long time, it seems to me that the default should be set to how it used to work. I.e., if I open a document from one year ago, I should not have to go through it and replace all of the cross-references.
(In reply to Stéphane Guillou (stragu) from comment #6) > That was introduced by https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/117156, which > mentions: "changed cross-references values to lists: they are now including > full list label string" Just explicitly quoting the commit: aa5c6d127559912ad60a63fbd972b78fb8f9691b (and its 7.2 cherrypick 9987b518fca1476bd0ce8c86bcf6ac7c81f7b580). (In reply to Andrew Conley from comment #9) > But I add that, given that this worked a particular way for a long time, it > seems to me that the default should be set to how it used to work. I.e., if > I open a document from one year ago, I should not have to go through it and > replace all of the cross-references. @Vasily, any comment about this?