Issue 44903

Summary:	Calc terms should be changed to be more distinct, Change spreadsheet to workbook
Product:	Calc	Reporter:	peschtra <peschtra>
Component:	ui	Assignee:	AOO issues mailing list <issues>
Status:	CONFIRMED ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	Trivial
Priority:	P3	CC:	issues
Version:	OOo 2.0 Beta
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Issue Type:	ENHANCEMENT	Latest Confirmation in:	---
Developer Difficulty:	---

Description peschtra 2005-03-12 20:12:11 UTC

It would be more clear if the term in Calc which describes the whole file was
changed from Spreadsheet to Workbook. This is true for 2 reasons:

1) Currently the term for the whole file is Spreadsheet and the term for one
sheet in the whole file is sheet. I think this is redundant and confusing. If I
refer to a spreadsheet I want to be referring to one sheet, not an entire file
or collection of individual sheets. This is especially tricky when trying to
write documentation, because I say "the spreadsheet properties" or something
like that, the user who is reading will probably think I am referring to one
sheet, while in OOo speak I am referring to the whole file.

2) I hate this reason, but here I think it makes sense. This change would put us
more in line with the terminology that MS uses. I think for something like this,
it makes more sense to try to work with standard nomenclature. 

The second reason alone wouldn't be enough to merit the switch, but I think the
two reasons together warrant some serious consideration to this change. We need
to be able to be clear in our help files and in documentation. Making this
change will allow this.

Comment 1 swisher 2005-03-21 20:20:39 UTC

FWIW, Lotus 1-2-3 uses "workbook" and "worksheet", while Quattro Pro uses
"notebook" and "page". (Yes, they are both still around.) So there is more than
one other vendor that uses workbook/worksheet.

Comment 2 mipsv 2005-04-05 16:04:08 UTC

 This is probably a good idea.  This way users with limited OOo experience (and
potentially more experience with other commerical apps) will not discount the
functionality of the OOo Calc functions.  I think Workbook might be a TM however
something like OpenBook or OBook or just as descriptive would work just as well? 
Why change? To ease training and transition work and cost. However an
explanation might be ok.

Comment 3 swisher 2005-04-05 16:37:35 UTC

There is no need to invent alternatives to "workbook"; it is not a trademark.
"Workbook" is used by both MS Excel and Lotus 1-2-3 (owned by IBM). It is not
claimed as a trademark by either Microsoft
<http://www.microsoft.com/library/toolbar/3.0/trademarks/en-us.mspx> or IBM
<http://www.ibm.com/legal/copytrade.shtml>. Further, "workbook" is an ordinary
dictionary word, and therefore not trademark-able.

Comment 4 frank 2005-04-08 09:43:27 UTC

IMHO we do not need a change here. If you talk about spreadsheet normally an
Application is meant. If you want to talk about a special Sheet you will
normally name it.

I think we should not try to clone Excel. And MS nomenclatura isn't in any way a
standard.

Nevertheless I re-assign it to requirements for evaluation and decission making.

Frank

Comment 5 peschtra 2005-04-08 23:48:12 UTC

FST -- One reason for the change would be for writing documentation where you
aren't always naming a specific sheet, you are being more general, as I
explained in my initial message.

I am wondering what you argument against this is? I don't care if we clone
excel. I just want a differentiation made between the spreadsheet document as a
whole and a sheet in a spreadsheet.

Look right there, I had to use 12 words to clarify what I meant. This could be
reduced.

Comment 6 ace_dent 2008-05-16 00:51:47 UTC

OpenOffice.org Issue Tracker - Feedback Request.

The Issue you raised is currently assigned to 'Requirements' pending review, but
has not been updated within the last 3 years. Please consider re-testing with
one of the latest versions of OOo, as the problem(s) may have already been
addressed. Either use the recent stable version:
http://download.openoffice.org/index.html
or consider trying the new OOo 3 BETA (still in testing):
http://download.openoffice.org/3.0beta/
 
Please report back the outcome so this Issue may be Closed or Progressed as
necessary - otherwise it may be Resolved as Invalid in the future. You may also
wish to search for (and note) any duplicates of this Issue that may have
advanced further by checking the Issue Tracker:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/query.cgi
 
Many thanks,
Andrew
 
Cleaning-up and Closing old Issues as part of:
~ The Grand Bug Squash, pre v3 ~
http://marketing.openoffice.org/3.0/announcementbeta.html