Issue 22747 - XML filter adaptors and macros
Summary: XML filter adaptors and macros
Alias: None
Product: xml
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.1
Hardware: PC Linux, all
: P2 Trivial with 1 vote (vote)
Target Milestone: OOo 2.0
Assignee: joerg.skottke
QA Contact: issues@xml
Keywords: regression
Depends on:
Reported: 2003-11-22 22:54 UTC by em2
Modified: 2004-12-08 13:30 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description em2 2003-11-22 22:54:50 UTC
Why are the document's macros not passed to

It seems to be impossible to write (in C++, at the API level)
an export filter which exports the document macros (as the
com::sun::star::script::XWhatever APIs don't work either).
Comment 1 michael.brauer 2004-01-07 09:13:04 UTC
MIB->AB: The XMLImporter and XMLExporter seervices in fact do not import and
export macros at the moment. What's required to do so is an additional service
that exports macros into a a flat XML file that can be used by the XMLImporter
service. The same is required for the import.
Comment 2 ab 2004-01-16 14:18:37 UTC
-> Started
Comment 3 2004-05-18 15:00:01 UTC
According to the roadmap of 2.0
( this
issue has been scheduled for 3.0. 
Comment 4 jogi 2004-07-28 14:12:06 UTC
I don't think that's an OOo Later issue: #116240 of our old bugtracker database
describes a problem we haven't had in OOo 1.1 with macros at events. 
See: tEventsToObjects testcase in

JSI->AB: Is it possible to fix it in OOo 2.0 timeframe?
Comment 5 jogi 2004-07-28 14:13:11 UTC
setting keyword "regression".
Comment 6 ab 2004-07-28 14:35:56 UTC
AB->JSI: Everything depends on priorities. I'm sure this could be done in OOo 2.0 
timeframe. The question simply is if it is important enough to do it instead of
fixes. According to TBO's comment above obviously somebody decided that it is 
not important enough. I don't see what #116240 has to do with this besides the 
fact that the problem described by this tasks makes it more difficult to reproduce.

And as far as I remember the scenario this task is far from beeing simple. Of
you're right that this is regression in the sense of "functionality is lost" but
tely due to the completely new bin filter concept this is not just a small mistake 
somewhere but really missing functionality requiring a lot of work.
Comment 7 jogi 2004-07-29 07:42:25 UTC
#116240 describes (in a summary) that loading events on objects (=macros)  in an
.sdw and saving them in an .sxw (XML) runs into data loss. We have searched for
the reason and did not know that we all have agreed to loose SO5.2 macros now in
OOo 2.0 - because we have no problems in OOo 1.x. And yes, "loosing
functionality" is the most important criteria if there is no decision which said
that we have agreed to do so.
Comment 8 jogi 2004-07-29 08:21:34 UTC
I have changed the target after some evaluation and this is data loss. If you
want to set it down to a lower target we have to escalate it,
Comment 9 jogi 2004-07-29 08:24:11 UTC
Changing type (it's a defect) and priority (data loss=2)
Comment 10 ab 2004-08-13 09:24:38 UTC
Comment 11 thomas.benisch 2004-08-18 17:39:16 UTC
Comment 12 thomas.benisch 2004-11-01 09:07:00 UTC
fixed in CWS xmlbasic
Comment 13 thomas.benisch 2004-11-01 09:32:53 UTC
Comment 14 thomas.benisch 2004-11-01 09:33:52 UTC
TBE->JSK: Please verify in CWS xmlbasic.
Comment 15 joerg.skottke 2004-12-08 13:29:47 UTC
checked, fixed
Comment 16 joerg.skottke 2004-12-08 13:30:13 UTC