Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Issue 25072
Specification: Cross-References to Headings
Last modified: 2013-08-07 14:43:03 UTC
To be specified: - dialog for cross-references contains entry for headings - when this entry is active a heading can be chosen - a reference will be set at the selected heading - a cross-reference will be inserted at cursor
Please find the spec here: http://specs.openoffice.org/writer/numbering/Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.sxw
As an interim measure until this is released I wrote a macro for creating cross-references to outline headings. It maybe useful in your work. The macro is available from: http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/hillview/OOo/ My solution to the master document issue was to have the macro create references to currently open documents. When that document is part of a master document the references display correctly. My preferred solution would be to use the navigator. To quote from Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.sxw: "The solution of this issue is not that easy, because cross references can not be created for all types of objects shown in the navigator (i.e. graphics and tables without a caption). So this requirement is only a future task." But this is true of hyperlinks as well. A tidy solution to graphics and tables without captions would be prompt the user for them. I also note in the proposed solution that headings will not be collapsable (although documents will be). In a large document finding your heading in a fully expanded list can be time consuming. Having collapsable/expandable headings would be a definite improvement whether it be a separate dialog or better yet in the navigator. Cheers, Ian Laurenson
*** Issue 2204 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
FL: Please note that duplicate issue 2204 has many (currently 46) votes and a high prio.
FL: Spec. is now final and ready for string check.
on my to do list. To be done by May 28
Liz->FL: Sorry for the delay Rev done, changes coming via mail. Please make sure you agree with them before sending to Dev. Thx!
FL->HB: Spec is now final and ready for implementation.
Spec->FEATURE
according to http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=releases&msgNo=7690 this issue will be set to OOoLater
*** Issue 42389 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 33289 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
This issue needs to be considered for the next milestone. Therefore the concerning flags were set. Hi Frank, as a feature this is now on the owner requirements to get taken into account as requirement. You are cc'ed.
From a pure user point of view: The proposed solution in the spec. doc. fits me perfectly well !!
*** Issue 52437 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 55793 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
From the issue(er) 55793: I appréciated the specs document which fits exactly my point (you just can add Word dit it long before v2002/XP !). Very good job. But now what ?? If you let aside the maybe little more difficult tasks and certainly not so important (ie 1.Insert cross references via the navigator 2.Predefined Cross references like “see chapter # on page #” and the like 3.Cross References Between Master / Child Documents in hierarchical tree), what about the release of the main task (implement titles selection list in the field dlg) ?
Additional issues that are duplicates of this issue: issue 3802, issue 13150, issue 20555, issue 20661, issue 26032, issue 32444, issue 42389, issue 47606, issue 49050 Additional issues depending on this: issue 2593, issue 40518, issue 50667 The lack of this feature is quite fatal to using OpenOffice for writing contracts (and the lack of the dependent features fatal to attempts to collaborate with others using MS Word to write contracts).
For clarification - the spec at http://specs.openoffice.org/writer/numbering/Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.sxw includes the specification for cross-referencing numbered paragraphs. This issue ID is not limited to cross-referencing headings as the summary would suggest.
Set target
So may I again request clarification: When will it be possible to select all headings as cross-references? Currently, it is a PITA to do cross-referencing towards headings. I need to be able to insert a cross-reference to a heading by chapter number, e. g.: "Cross referencing is important (cf. chapter 2.4)" Ideally, "chapter 2.4" would be a clickable link. Also, when I insert another chapter before 2.4, I want the cross reference to be updated to, let's say 2.5 as well. When will this be available in OOo?
target of the spec is OOLater, so please consider the target milestone.
I have again started a discussion about the target of this issue. New target for this feature is now OOo 2.2! Thank you all for your votes and support for this important issue!
It says Target milestone "OOo 2.x", not 2.2?
Spec is in the works by Oliver.
accepted. Currently, I'm rewrite the specification according to the new iTeam, build by FL, ES, UFI and OD. It's excepted that the new draft will be available in January 2007.
A new specification draft is available. See website http://specs.openoffice.org/, link OpenOffice.org Writer or directly http://specs.openoffice.org/writer/numbering/Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.odt
*** Issue 3802 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 20555 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 26032 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
The new spec looks good to me - it does what is needed for legal documents (contracts, legislation and the like).
According to note date "Oct 5 16:36:16 +0000 2006" the target for this feature/bug is OO.org-2.2 ("New target for this feature is now OOo 2.2!") As OO.org-2.2 has been released, it seems this functionality did not make it into 2.2. Is there an idea when this important functionality will be available in OO.org?
OD->rbos: Sorry for keeping the target data not up to date. The OpenDocument file format needs to be extended for this important feature. The corresponding proposal is already accepted by OASIS OpenDocument TC and the extension will make into the next OpenDocument file format version - this is planned to be 1.2. Thus, the earliest date, when this feature can be available is the OOo version, which supports the next OpenDocument file format version. As far as I know this will be OOo 3.0 and we are planning to have this feature also available in this version of OOo 3.0
Hi OD, thank you for clarification. I understand that it is hard to predict when things will be available. I saw that OO.org-2.4 is expected to be available in September this year (2007). Does that mean that OO.org-2.0 won't be available for the coming (let's say) 12 months or so? BTW I could not find an expected release date when the spec for ODF-1.2. Is this known already?
OD->rbos: ad your first questions: I think the answer is Yes. ad your second questions: I think the answer is No. The OASIS OpenDocument TC is currently working on OpenDocument 1.2. From my point of view it will take till next year to have the next version available.
Wouldn't it be possible as an interim measure to introduce an OOo-specific namespace to implement this feature prior to the ODF update? After all one of the purported benefits of XML with namespaces is that apps that do not understand a particular piece of information can just skip it. It would seem a shame to me to have to wait for ODF to be updated every time a feature requires a change to the file format - that would give some ammunition to others who might like to claim that ODF is not a viable format for office documents.
OD->troy_rollo: Your proposed way is possible. But (and it's a VERY BIG but) in point of view it doesn't make sense, because it is contradictory to supporting an open standard. The main purpose of an open standard is that *NOT* every application supporting such a standard introduces its own features and extensions.
I was writing a contract this morning and was puzzled with this issue. I have been using FinalWriter (on Amiga!!!) 15 years ago, most versions of MS Word, LaTeX who all support this and I just could not believe there would be no support of this basic feature. I agree with the poster above that after 3+ years this gives ammunition to the people who will say that the "other standard" does not have this issue. Could there be a way forward that is faster than wait another year for OOo 3.0 ?
Waiting for ODF 1.2 then OOo 3.0 suggests it is likely to be at least another 2 years, but more likely 3 to 4 before we could see this feature in a production version. Alternative ways forward are : 1. OOo-specific namespace containing this feature; 2. As in (1) but use another file extension, and/or don't claim the interim format is ODF; or 3. Fast-track an ODF 1.1.1 that includes this feature. Other than that we would appear to be stuck without this for a few more years.
In the context of the recent defeat of ODF legislation efforts such as this one where MS stopped legislation mandating ODF, which is currently linked from the OOo home page: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&articleId=9022878 How many legislators are going to back ODF mandates when all MS has to do is say "You can't write your legislation using ODF"?
> How many legislators are going to back ODF mandates when all MS has to do is > say "You can't write your legislation using ODF"? A remark like this does not help to solve this bug (probably). Anyway, what is holding them back to use ODF? If it is this (cross referencing headings); in case of OO.org they can use a macro: http://www.ooomacros.org/user.php#113812
The part that prevents ODF from being used for legislation is the lack of cross-references to numbered paragraphs. The lawyers who draft legislation use these extensively because the numbers of clauses in a Bill will change many times during drafting and clauses make references to other clauses. Without cross references to numbered paragraphs there is going to be some kind of manual process involved when clause numbers change, which happens "automatically" due to the operation of outline numbering. Also few legislative drafters have the technical proficiency to work with macros. I am not trying to be provocative here - legislative (and contractual) drafting of even moderate complexity is so much easier when cross-references to numbered paragraphs is available that few would be prepared to switch to a product that did not do it. I was pointing out that there is a huge obstacle facing the ODF alliance's efforts while this feature is missing, so this may provide some incentive to fast-track it.
Agreed with troy_rollo. I voted for 25072, because 26032 (focused exactly on this topic, which is my personal PITA when you have to prepare simple "public procurement" material) was marked as duplicate to this one. No way to turn on macros because of that. No way to EVER turn on macros. Security, you know...
If OOo had the ability to do proper cross-referencing without a lot of cludges and work that would give me the ability to roll out OOo across our company, and justify spending some money on it (unfortunatly I can not justify to managment the need to spend money on developing software when other software does the job, though not as good). Also, a large, first rate, NY law firm would probably be interested because they are being forced to use Word over the "better" (for them - and for us) WordPerfect because their clients are using Word. OOo could give them the needed features yet maintain the ease of Word "compatibility", but hopefully produce more OOo users in their (and our) clients. Unfortunatly there is one large feature missing - easy to use Cross-References to Headings. I would suggest staying away from OOo specific namespaces for potential future compatibility issues. However, the OOo team should look at fast-tracking this feature into the OOo development and as soon as OASIS approves this feature for the ODF standard (if they haven't already), it can be added to OOo even before the full standard is approved. It has been done for years.
I give up. The good news is that the competition offered this for 10-15 years. I simply give up. I have been waiting since around 2001. Free and open source, who cares if you cannot do your work and especially like you did 15 years ago. Ciao
sajer: who cares? You are probably not understanding that OO.org is the work of hundreds of people who are worked relentlessly for years (starting with StarOffice) and now with hundreds of contributors.. You are free to vote with your money since seemingly you have enough of it to afford the ridiculously priced competition. I would just like to say: OpenOffice.org gives me some frustration sometimes but it works perfectly for nearly 100% of my needs. So I shall be patient and vote with my feet and money. Thank you OO.org team!
sajer is perfectly aware of the OOo way of working, don't worry. He's worked quite a lot around OOo. He's just fed up with a very important feature still missing (and I agree). Why improving kerning in 2.2 IIRC (did anyone ever noticed the difference ?) when such feature has to be workarounded by a macro to be installed with also specific process because importing macro dialogs is still broken ??? Who uses OOo ? The base of future regular users is all the students writing their thesis, reports, ... And the headings cross-referencing is one of the most used features. So why disappoint them with this lack of usability ?
I care. I contributed. I know how it works, and it didn't work for me. All these songs about community developed software I hear all the time, but I see few impressive results. I have been waiting since 2001. 2001!!!!! for features I used in the early nineteens. I have been patient, haven't I? I did contribute, did I not? More than five years of patience is enough. Actually, I do not have much money, and as a father with a family, it is not funny to use big amounts of money on software. However, do you guys understand how much TIME that is lost on software that does not work or is too primitive? All this community stuff doesn't matter at all when I sit here and WORK! OpenOffice.org did not move on from where Office 97 was in 1997. You should be more concerned about people unhappy with OpenOffice.org than with me not satisfied with it. Installed 2001. Uninstalled 2007. Now going to get some work done to save time, money and frustrations.
>OpenOffice.org did not move on from where Office 97 was in 1997 Oh I "almost" forgot that time MS Office 97 did have this feature! I even have a Office 97 license on an ancient laptop running Windows 95! OOo cannot even match the software on this laptop, this historic document.
I agree with sajer! In fact, I believe that WordPerfect had this feature even before Word 97 (and WordPerfect still does it better). At a corporate level, we can not use OOo until this feature is added and I can not justify to the management to spend any money on software development when our current Word works and any thing else can be done with WordPerfect. We would spend money on something that works but it does not make sense for a us to spend on something that does not do the job. BTW, the two features that we need to move over are in the top 20 requests! At a personal level, I like OOo and am willing to pay for a feature. In fact, in the past I think I even asked where to send the dough-nuts!
To give an idea of how important this feature is for the OO.org community have a look at this url: http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/buglist.cgi?resort=1&issue_type=FEATURE;component=Word%20processor;issue_status=UNCONFIRMED;issue_status=NEW;issue_status=STARTED;issue_status=REOPENED;issue_status=RESOLVED;issue_status=VERIFIED;email1=;emailtype1=exact;emailassigned_to1=1;email2=;emailtype2=exact;emailreporter2=1;issueidtype=include;issue_id=;changedin=;votes=50;chfieldfrom=;chfieldto=;chfieldvalue=;short_desc=;short_desc_type=allwords;long_desc=;long_desc_type=allwords;issue_file_loc=;issue_file_loc_type=fulltext;status_whiteboard=;status_whiteboard_type=fulltext;keywords=;keywords_type=anytokens;field0-0-0=noop;type0-0-0=noop;value0-0-0=;newqueryname=;Submit%20query=Submit%20query&order=issues.votes%20desc%2C%20issues.priority%2C%20issues.issue_type From this list it can be determined that the bug needs at least 5 more people to vote for this bug to make it to number 2 and 12 more to make it to the first spot.
This issue is of greater importance than most people would realize. It is one problem in the MS compatibility area that prevents using OOo where I work. I don't know if it is too late to mention this but when the cross-referencing feature is incorporated it would be of great benefit if the program automatically prompted the use if the user changes any of the text in the referenced paragraph to check to see if the cross-reference is invalidated by the changes.
OD->bill_leach: Currently, such a feature isn't planned - see the specification found at http://specs.openoffice.org/writer/numbering/Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.od It not too late for new suggestions and features for this "direct cross-references" feature. I suggest, that you work out a detailed proposal for your requested feature. You can attach your proposal to this issue. Then, it can be discussed. Thx in advance for your contribution.
*** Issue 78670 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Background: Cross referencing is used extensively in a number of different document types in multiple disciplines. Examples include legal documents, medical documents, and the entire class of documents called “Technical Procedures,” among others. The users that are writing and editing these documents have to be able to insert, check, and edit “links” that exist between portions of text (usually a numbered paragraph). For Open Office to be accepted in disciplines where cross referencing is used extensively support must be convenient and solid. To my knowledge, none of the existing word processing programs, certainly not MS Word assist the user in maintaining these links. I believe that an opportunity exist for open source in general and Open Office specifically to once again show the power FOSS. One of the huge problems with direct cross referencing is that as the document is revised to cross referencing may either break or no longer be correct and no warning is provided to the editor. To me, this is unacceptable in today's age of computing power. Proposal: Provide a convenient means to reference any numbered paragraph. Allow the writer to include additional text with the paragraph number that will show up where the reference is inserted. Internally, in the link information keep a copy of the text associated with the paragraph that is the destination for the link. If a change is made to the destination paragraph then prompt the user to confirm that the link is still valid Provide a “remind me later” option Provide a mean for the user to check all of the links.
OD->bill_leach: Thx for your input. I've copied your proposal text to comment it inline - see below > Proposal: > Provide a convenient means to reference any numbered paragraph. I think we already covered this point in the current specification - for all paragraphs, which belongs to a list and have a number on its list level, a direct cross-reference can be inserted. Does the current specification satisfy this part of your proposal? > Allow the writer to include additional text with the paragraph number that will > show up where the reference is inserted. What do you exactly mean by "include additional text"? Should this "additional text" be part of the reference field? Or should the cross-referencing dialog provide an input field for this "additional text", which is simple inserted on performing action "Insert chosen reference"? > Internally, in the link information keep a copy of the text associated with the > paragraph that is the destination for the link. I don't know, if I understand you correctly. Do you want, that the reference field should keep a copy of the complete text of the referenced paragraph including its possible existing list label? If yes, what's the purpose of this copied text, especially in the case that the reference field only shows e.g., the page number the referenced paragraph is on. > If a change is made to the destination paragraph then prompt the user to confirm > that the link is still valid I think here you should be more detailed, if and how should such a prompt to the user be presented. Do you want that a dialog pops up, if the user change the text of a referenced paragraph, if the reference field only show the chapter number of the chapter the paragraph is in? What about the use case, that more than one reference field to the reference paragraph exists? A lot of stuff has to be considered here. BTW, in general a reference field isn't updated, if the reference item is changed/deleted or its environment (page, chapter, etc.) is changed. The user have to manual update the fields - menu Tools - Update - Fields > Provide a “remind me later” option If I understand you correct, this option should be used to suppress the above mentioned direct prompt to the user on a change of the referenced item. Correct? > Provide a mean for the user to check all of the links. I think you mean that a certain tool/function should be provided to check every reference field that it is still valid? Correct? My summary of your proposed items: For the first three items some clarifications are needed - see my questions above. With the latter three items - if I understand you correct - you propose tools/functions for the user for check the validity of reference fields. For such a feature more details and input is needed - see my above questions and comments. I would propose to create a new specification for such a feature. Thus, the current specification describes the basic functionality for direct cross-referencing of heading and numbered paragraph and the new specification an additional feature based on this basic functionality. Would this be ok for you? If yes, please submit a new feature issue describing this feature and link this new feature to this issue.
> Provide a convenient means to reference any numbered paragraph. I think we already covered this point in the current specification - for all paragraphs, which belongs to a list and have a number on its list level, a direct cross-reference can be inserted. Does the current specification satisfy this part of your proposal? YES IT DOES, THANKS. > Allow the writer to include additional text with the paragraph number > that will show up where the reference is inserted. What do you exactly mean by "include additional text"? Should this "additional text" be part of the reference field? Or should the cross-referencing dialog provide an input field for this "additional text", which is simple inserted on performing action "Insert chosen reference"? An example: Usually direct-cross references to numbered paragraphs will insert a link that displays only the number of the referenced paragraph. What I would like to see is an option to add additional text such as "paragraph " to link display. This capability should be in the requester that is used to choose the direct-cross reference. Some choices for such additional optional text could be in a drop down list within the requester. Any such additional optional text typed into the requester by the user should probably be added to the drop down list. It would be best if text could be added both before and/or after the actual link text. Also, I would like to see the ability to assign aliases (use optional) for the numbered direct-cross reference links that would display instead of the line/paragraph/page number. Again, the additional optional text could be included with the alias. > Internally, in the link information keep a copy of the text associated > with the paragraph that is the destination for the link. I don't know, if I understand you correctly. Do you want, that the reference field should ... I'll try to explain what capability I would like to see. My idea for implementation could quite possibly be the worst way to achieve the goal. What I would like if for the program to automagically notify the user if anything about the referenced text changes so that the user can decide if the link has become invalid. In my work I see this problem with astonishing regularity. Someone revises a sentence (that happens to be referenced). The person making the revision has no indication that the text being revised is referenced elsewhere in the document. The reference becomes invalid (because of the revision) and no one is aware that there might even be a problem. Everything else that I proposed is related to "invalid" (logically as well as physically) link problem. In terms of "tools" to aid the document writer, just having a way to display that references exist to line/paragraph/page/object. Such a display should give at least the page number where link exists. At least that way the writer could read both the location where the direct-reference link was placed and examine the "thing" that the link points to in order to ensure that the link is correct. An important point for me is that there should be a tool menu item that checks for "physically" broken links, that is links that don't point anywhere (because the linked location was deleted). It is NOT enough that the link shows up in the text with something like "Reference not found." But even a check for "physically" broken links would NOT be enough. A means for the writer to conveniently check the referenced and referencing text is important.
OD->bill_leach: Thanks for the fast reply. Thus, we have to further suggestions for the "direct cross-reference"-feature: (1) Tool and support to check logical and physical validity of references. (2) Enhancement for the insertion of direct cross-references - namely optional text fragments before and after the inserted reference inclusive storing of previously added text fragments and aliases/short cuts for certain reference types inclusive optional text. Correct? I personally support these suggestions, especially in the user scenarios you described. I see these suggestions as advanced features based on the basic functionality described in the current specification. Thus, - as I already did for suggestions (1) - I propose to submit for each of suggestions a new feature issue. For each of these features a corresponding specification should be worked out. Thus, we can first implement the basics and can then provide further features based on these extensions.
target 3.0
*** Issue 83808 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Resolution of this issue will be a BIG time saver. -Reports -Specs -Theses
Implemenation of specification http://specs.openoffice.org/writer/numbering/Direct_Cross_References_to_Headings_and_Numberings.odt done in cws swcrossref01. cws swcrossref01 is targeted for OOo 3.0
Woohoo! Thank you, this is going to make life *much* easier for people trying to get OpenOffice accepted in legal and legislative environments.
People who have voted for this issue might also consider voting for 2593, which would allow Word documents with these type of cross referencing to be imported correctly into OOWriter.
@OD: Please use the current Specification Template i.e. remove any references to German strings, thanx!
uploaded adjusted version of the specification
It is trouble that this function, whose was presented in MS Word 6.1 on Windows 3.1 (!) more than 1O years ago, is still missing in OOo.
OD->rater: Thus, you will be very happy that this feature is now implemented and that it will make its way into OOo 3.0 BTW, it was more an usability issue than an issue of missing functionality.
specification done -> status verified
Now that this issue has been fixed, you may be interested to report your vote for issue 2593: http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2593
Hi, Verified in DEV300m28 on Linux. Closing. Sophie
*** Issue 4439 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
*** Issue 23284 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Could everybody with votes on issue # 25072 (currently 65 votes), which was completed 3 years ago, please move them to issue number 2593 <http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2593>? Issue 25072 was implementing cross references to numbered paragraphs and related things. Issue 2593 is the issue for getting importing and exporting of those cross-references right so that we can read and write Word and RTF documents that have these cross-references in them (which is rather useful for collaborating with others who are using Word).
Removing temporary CCs to people with votes on this issue who were not on the CC list.