Issue 97844 - DOCX text appears at top of document instead as vertical text
Summary: DOCX text appears at top of document instead as vertical text
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of issue 93842
Alias: None
Product: Writer
Classification: Application
Component: formatting (show other issues)
Version: OOO300m9
Hardware: Unknown All
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: writerneedsconfirm
QA Contact: issues@sw
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-01-07 16:03 UTC by albert617
Modified: 2009-01-08 13:33 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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

Attachments
vertical text is seen twice-- once at the beginning of the document and once in the proper place (30.65 KB, application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document)
2009-01-07 16:04 UTC, albert617 		no flags Details
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description albert617 2009-01-07 16:03:12 UTC 
For a DOCX file, extra text appears at top of document.  The source of this text
is from vertical text seen later in the document (i.e. the vertical text is
still present and visible so it is really showing up twice).
Comment 1 albert617 2009-01-07 16:04:06 UTC 
Created attachment 59217 [details]
vertical text is seen twice-- once at the beginning of the document and once in the proper place
Comment 2 albert617 2009-01-07 16:10:45 UTC 
Ignore my original description.  Here's a new one to replace it.

For a DOCX file, text appears at top of document instead of as vertical text
later in the document.
Comment 3 albert617 2009-01-07 16:12:39 UTC 
Description for "sample in WORD.docx" is incorrect.  It should read: vertical
text is seen at the beginning of the document instead of in its proper place
next to the graphics.

Note: the graphics isn't cropped according to specifications in the DOCX file. 
The words should not appear next to the graphics.  This caused some confusion on
my part.
Comment 4 michael.ruess 2009-01-08 13:33:26 UTC 
Already tracked as issue 93842 and issue 89942.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 93842 ***
Comment 5 michael.ruess 2009-01-08 13:33:56 UTC 
Closing duplicate.