Created attachment 75184 [details] docs http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Microsoft-SQL-Server/The-Weather-Channel-Australia/Powerful-Database-Brings-Brighter-Outlook-for-Weather-Forecaster/4000008415 Hello, this is (another ) broken docx document. This time directly from microsoft website. It looks quite ok in LO 4, but not in 3.6. Please rename subject as I dont't know how to discribe it.
Created attachment 75185 [details] in LO 4
Created attachment 75186 [details] in ms 2013
Created attachment 75187 [details] in LO 3.6
Also seems there are font issues. I don't know if i should create another bug, or make this "double bug". Would make sence not to fix it in 3.6.
I can confirm odd table handling using Linux Mint 15 x64 with LibreOffice Version: 4.2.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: c7da99f37197fb1446af07f17ba33978f15e7f6 The most visible behavior is that the table is cut of (see attached pdf). Kind regards, Joren
Created attachment 79997 [details] Export using Version: 4.2.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: c7da99f37197fb1446af07f17ba33978f15e7f6
thanks for renaming.
Adding self to CC if not already on
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** 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 on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.0.4 or later) https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System 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) http://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: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Thank you for your help! -- The LibreOffice QA Team This NEW Message was generated on: 2016-01-17
I do not expect this to be fixed. BUT will take a look on this later.
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** 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 http://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://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
A general discussion is needed: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122730
Created attachment 157410 [details] DOCX compared MSO 2013 and LO 7.0+ This bug was reported wrong as "document based" and not "issue based". Issues were not described. I tested in LO 7.0+ and compared to MSO 2013. Generally this 2007 DOCX opens fine except for 2 issues: 1. MSO is 4 pages and LO 5 pages; already seen in page 2 for the whole paragraph (“Reliability managing this data ..). Same 5 pages if DOCX resaved in MSO. We had 4 pages in OO 3.3 but it didn't look good, there were no footers. So I concluded that this was never the same as in MSO. This is more implementationError. I add screenshot from MSO and LO 7.0+ where page 2 is better seen. Footer size in LO is not correct for Footer - Section 2 from MSO. That looks like the cause and I'll rename. 2. Footer is different with double "Microsft" in LO; but that's already in bug 69686, so let's keep it there (which is later but opened for that issue).
Dear cincenko, 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
(In reply to Timur from comment #13) > 1. MSO is 4 pages and LO 5 pages; already seen in page 2 for the whole > paragraph (“Reliability managing this data ..). > Same 5 pages if DOCX resaved in MSO. > We had 4 pages in OO 3.3 but it didn't look good, there were no footers. So > I concluded that this was never the same as in MSO. This is more > implementationError. > I add screenshot from MSO and LO 7.0+ where page 2 is better seen. > Footer size in LO is not correct for Footer - Section 2 from MSO. > That looks like the cause and I'll rename. > The footer size is not correct because of the unwanted images from the IF field. Manually removing them restores the expected layout, 4 pages and all paragraphs are on the correct page. I'd say this document looks now good - even after save & reload (in Word)! - except for the issue in bug 69686.