Issue 93204 - Excel compatibility issue: RIGHT function in Excel converts returned text string to numbers if numbers; OOo returns only text
Summary: Excel compatibility issue: RIGHT function in Excel converts returned text str...
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of issue 5658
Alias: None
Product: Calc
Classification: Application
Component: open-import (show other issues)
Version: OOo 2.4.0
Hardware: PC All
: P2 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: spreadsheet
QA Contact: issues@sc
Depends on:
Reported: 2008-08-28 12:57 UTC by markedgar
Modified: 2009-07-12 17:58 UTC (History)
1 user (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 markedgar 2008-08-28 12:57:48 UTC
When reviewing an Excel spreadsheet, it became apparent that a cell with a RIGHT
function in it was referring to a cell with text in it, in the form of "TEXT  
NUMBER". The RIGHT function was used to extract the NUMBER, and paste that as
the result. Excel recognizes that NUMBER is a number, and pastes it into the
cell as such. OOo only recognizes NUMBER as a textural part of the string, and
pastes it into the cell as text, EVEN THOUGH IT DISPLAYS EXACTLY LIKE A NUMBER!
Of course subsequent references to that cell do not provide the correct answer
if thought of as a number, when it is in fact text.

berating an Excel user for stuffing up his spreadsheet was it pointed out to me
that the results I was viewing was not what had been saved in Excel.

I opened the same file in Excel, and verified that it was as they say, and that
OOo had simply failed to recognize the numbers.

I presume LEFT and any other similar functions would perform similarly, and
should also be made compatible.
Comment 1 markedgar 2008-08-28 13:05:54 UTC
Please change first sentence to read more clearly:

"When using Calc to review a spreadsheet created in Excel,... "

Also, I dropped the priority level. It's still important, given the consequences
that may go hidden, but be costing a lot of money. I've dropped the priority
because it's a bit esoteric, I suppose, and there's probably not THAT many
people for whom this is relevant.
Comment 2 dridgway 2008-12-30 15:58:18 UTC
Seems like a dupe of issue 5658, which has been around for 6+ years. If not,
feel free to reopen.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 5658 ***
Comment 3 Mechtilde 2009-07-12 17:58:29 UTC
duplicate -> closed