Issue 25072 - Specification: Cross-References to Headings
Summary: Specification: Cross-References to Headings
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Writer
Classification: Application
Component: formatting (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.0.0
Hardware: All All
: P3 Trivial with 62 votes (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
QA Contact: issues@sw
URL:
Keywords: rfe_eval_ok, usability
: 2204 3802 4439 20555 23284 26032 33289 42389 52437 55793 78670 83808 (view as issue list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 2593 40518 50667 81007
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2004-02-04 14:49 UTC by openoffice
Modified: 2013-08-07 14:43 UTC (History)
20 users (show)

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


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description openoffice 2004-02-04 14:49:55 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
Comment 2 iannz 2004-04-28 04:22:39 UTC
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
Comment 3 frank.loehmann 2004-05-06 10:03:40 UTC
*** Issue 2204 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 4 frank.loehmann 2004-05-06 10:08:59 UTC
FL: Please note that duplicate issue 2204 has many (currently 46) votes and a
high prio.
Comment 5 frank.loehmann 2004-05-06 14:59:07 UTC
FL: Spec. is now final and ready for string check.
Comment 6 e.matthis 2004-05-19 12:50:34 UTC
on my to do list. To be done by May 28
Comment 7 e.matthis 2004-06-03 16:52:09 UTC
Liz->FL: 
Sorry for the delay
Rev done, changes coming via mail.
Please make sure you agree with them before sending to Dev.
Thx!
Comment 8 frank.loehmann 2004-06-04 09:39:29 UTC
FL->HB: Spec is now final and ready for implementation.
Comment 9 openoffice 2004-06-17 11:31:10 UTC
Spec->FEATURE
Comment 10 Martin Hollmichel 2004-08-09 14:02:28 UTC
according to http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=releases&msgNo=7690
this issue will be set to OOoLater
Comment 11 eric.savary 2005-02-10 15:28:34 UTC
*** Issue 42389 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 12 eric.savary 2005-02-10 15:30:39 UTC
*** Issue 33289 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 13 bettina.haberer 2005-02-10 16:02:21 UTC
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.
Comment 14 paaguti 2005-02-11 09:29:13 UTC
From a pure user  point of view: The proposed solution in the spec. doc. fits me
perfectly well !! 
Comment 15 lohmaier 2005-07-25 19:51:11 UTC
*** Issue 52437 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 16 Regina Henschel 2005-10-11 18:36:49 UTC
*** Issue 55793 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 17 brunom 2005-10-13 17:23:13 UTC
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) ?
Comment 18 troy_rollo 2005-12-29 03:47:27 UTC
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). 
Comment 19 troy_rollo 2005-12-29 22:57:56 UTC
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. 
Comment 20 frank.loehmann 2006-05-30 08:57:26 UTC
Set target
Comment 21 diemer 2006-10-04 18:40:53 UTC
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?
Comment 22 eberlein 2006-10-04 19:22:44 UTC
target of the spec is OOLater, so please consider the target milestone.
Comment 23 frank.loehmann 2006-10-05 17:36:16 UTC
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!
Comment 24 sajer 2006-12-18 12:29:08 UTC
It says Target milestone "OOo 2.x", not 2.2?
Comment 25 Mathias_Bauer 2006-12-21 09:49:14 UTC
Spec is in the works by Oliver.
Comment 26 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2006-12-21 10:29:21 UTC
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.
Comment 27 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-02-16 11:20:48 UTC
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
Comment 28 bettina.haberer 2007-02-16 13:48:37 UTC
*** Issue 3802 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 29 bettina.haberer 2007-02-16 14:28:04 UTC
*** Issue 20555 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 30 bettina.haberer 2007-02-16 14:28:45 UTC
*** Issue 26032 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 31 troy_rollo 2007-02-18 22:07:19 UTC
The new spec looks good to me - it does what is needed for legal documents 
(contracts, legislation and the like).
Comment 32 rbos 2007-06-07 19:55:59 UTC
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?
Comment 33 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-06-11 09:44:42 UTC
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
Comment 34 rbos 2007-06-11 11:53:18 UTC
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?
Comment 35 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-06-11 12:28:26 UTC
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.
Comment 36 troy_rollo 2007-06-12 06:51:41 UTC
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.
Comment 37 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-06-12 08:14:14 UTC
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.
Comment 38 gproux 2007-06-13 02:26:25 UTC
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 ?
Comment 39 troy_rollo 2007-06-13 02:46:07 UTC
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.
Comment 40 troy_rollo 2007-06-13 02:55:54 UTC
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"?
Comment 41 rbos 2007-06-13 08:01:14 UTC
> 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

Comment 42 troy_rollo 2007-06-13 08:13:19 UTC
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.
Comment 43 ivand 2007-06-13 09:08:37 UTC
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...
Comment 44 amcguire 2007-06-13 15:50:39 UTC
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.
Comment 45 sajer 2007-06-17 00:01:56 UTC
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
Comment 46 gproux 2007-06-17 01:35:30 UTC
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!
Comment 47 hagar_de_lest 2007-06-17 08:27:12 UTC
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 ?
Comment 48 sajer 2007-06-17 10:36:42 UTC
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.
Comment 49 sajer 2007-06-17 10:41:40 UTC
>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.
Comment 50 amcguire 2007-06-18 14:50:24 UTC
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!
Comment 52 bill_leach 2007-08-09 22:10:33 UTC
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.
Comment 53 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-08-10 08:32:15 UTC
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.
Comment 54 eric.savary 2007-08-13 14:35:20 UTC
*** Issue 78670 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 55 bill_leach 2007-08-16 23:19:41 UTC
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.
Comment 56 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-08-22 14:57:28 UTC
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.
Comment 57 bill_leach 2007-08-22 18:01:47 UTC
> 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.
Comment 58 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-08-23 10:42:27 UTC
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.
Comment 59 Mathias_Bauer 2007-11-08 13:48:28 UTC
target 3.0
Comment 60 michael.ruess 2007-11-21 12:13:08 UTC
*** Issue 83808 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 61 othr 2007-11-22 12:19:29 UTC
Resolution of this issue will be a BIG time saver.
-Reports
-Specs
-Theses
Comment 62 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2007-12-05 11:31:59 UTC
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
Comment 63 troy_rollo 2007-12-05 22:10:12 UTC
Woohoo! Thank you, this is going to make life *much* easier for people trying 
to get OpenOffice accepted in legal and legislative environments.
Comment 64 troy_rollo 2007-12-11 23:07:24 UTC
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.
Comment 65 eric.savary 2008-01-08 20:49:29 UTC
@OD: Please use the current Specification Template i.e. remove any references to
German strings, thanx!
Comment 66 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2008-01-09 10:40:58 UTC
uploaded adjusted version of the specification
Comment 67 rater 2008-01-24 18:17:57 UTC
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. 
Comment 68 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2008-01-25 06:34:01 UTC
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.
Comment 69 Oliver-Rainer Wittmann 2008-02-18 14:12:14 UTC
specification done -> status verified
Comment 70 hagar_de_lest 2008-04-23 09:40:58 UTC
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
Comment 71 sgautier.ooo 2008-08-05 10:48:48 UTC
Hi, 
Verified in DEV300m28 on Linux. Closing. Sophie
Comment 72 jr 2009-06-14 01:17:31 UTC
*** Issue 4439 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 73 jr 2009-06-14 12:06:01 UTC
*** Issue 23284 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Comment 74 troy_rollo 2011-01-06 23:00:28 UTC
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).
Comment 75 troy_rollo 2011-01-06 23:06:29 UTC
Removing temporary CCs to people with votes on this issue who were not on the 
CC list.