Issue 102874

Summary: Deleted content shown in change tracking shouldn't be considered as actual content
Product: Writer Reporter: anieden <axel.niedenhoff>
Component: editingAssignee: AOO issues mailing list <issues>
Status: CONFIRMED --- QA Contact:
Severity: Trivial    
Priority: P3 CC: issues, jogi, Mathias_Bauer, thorsten.ziehm
Version: OOo 3.1Keywords: usability
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---
Description Flags
ODT file showing the wrong sum
a word 2008:mac created test document; changes should be shown in TOC and chapter
Word:mac 2008 displaying TOC with changes
OOO320m7 displaying [no] changes in TOC none

Description anieden 2009-06-17 14:38:34 UTC
In Writer, when I have a table with a cell that contains a sum calculated by
Writer itself, this sum is wrong when I change one of the values going into it
when change tracking is on.

I will provide a sample document with a simple table. A1 and A2 contain numbers,
A3 contains their sum. I then activated the tracking of changes and changed A1
from 5 to 12. A1 shows the change correctly. The sum in A3, however, gets mixed
up. It seems to use the concatenation of the old and new values in A1, instead
of just the new value.
Comment 1 anieden 2009-06-17 14:40:26 UTC
Created attachment 63043 [details]
ODT file showing the wrong sum
Comment 2 eric.savary 2009-06-17 16:37:22 UTC
- Provided table:
A1 5
A2 10
A3 SUM(A1:A2)=15

- Set Edit - Changes - Record
- Make sure Edit - Changes - View is ON
- Replace "5" in A1 by "12"
-> A1 now looks like this: 512 (where "5" is marked as deleted and "12" as
inserted) ->OK
- Now press F9 to update the table
-> A3 switches is to 522 as sum of 512+10

Which looks like a bug is a general redlining concept problematic: mixing up
"View information" (a content which used to be there) and text content.

The SUM() function is blind to such "fine" distinctions "Text is visible but
shouldn't be considered, actually it's bot there" and sees the whole written text.

The same can be achieved when a text modified while change tracking is ON, is
the source of a reference:

<ref_source>This is a text<ref_source>
<ref>This is a text</ref>

Will appear as:
This is a 
This is a 

When change tracking View is OFF
and as:
This is a _text_ ("_" stands for "deletion")
This is a text

When change tracking View is OFF.

So re-qualifying as ENHANCEMENT because changing this behavior supposes to
remake completely the concept of change tracking.

@anieden: to avoid such confusions in table, you'd better work with Change
tracking - View OFF.

@MBA: What do you think?

Comment 3 eric.savary 2009-08-18 16:06:37 UTC
*** Issue 104317 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 4 jogi 2010-01-02 17:53:04 UTC
Created attachment 66945 [details]
a word 2008:mac created test document; changes should be shown in TOC and chapter
Comment 5 jogi 2010-01-02 17:56:56 UTC
Created attachment 66946 [details]
Word:mac 2008 displaying TOC with changes
Comment 6 jogi 2010-01-02 17:57:48 UTC
Created attachment 66947 [details]
OOO320m7 displaying [no] changes in TOC
Comment 7 jogi 2010-01-02 18:01:11 UTC
I have attached a document and also two screenshots because issue 104317 has been marked as duplicate 
of this one.

Suggestion: To have an unambiogious view on the content the TOC and not only a chapter should display 
that there are changes pending. See like Word is doing. The TOC is also displaying the changes instead of 
only the chapter which has been deleted. OOo320_m7 displaying nothing, the user could thing that the 
2.4 chapter is in the document which would be wrong if the changes would be accepted.
Comment 8 jogi 2010-01-02 18:04:39 UTC
Platform ALL

@ES/MBA: OOoLater possible to switch to 3.x? 
Comment 9 Mathias_Bauer 2010-01-04 15:02:12 UTC
We will make some changes to change tracking sooner or later, especially to the
way how we deal with deleted content. So I have no objection against a target 3.x.
Comment 10 jogi 2010-01-15 07:14:01 UTC
Thx MBA! I ahve also switched the priority, because the data of changes is lost.
Comment 11 thorsten.ziehm 2011-03-07 15:28:04 UTC
Changed to priority 3. This isn't a stopper for a release.
(Issues with p1/p2 with keyword 'accessibility' and/or 'usability' are one category for stoppers. See