[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: ODF in KOffice
From:       Inge Wallin <inge () lysator ! liu ! se>
Date:       2009-08-26 20:49:32
Message-ID: 200908262249.32754.inge () lysator ! liu ! se
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 26 August 2009 17:14:08 Finn Gruwier Larsen wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> I have now completed my test of ODF compatibility of KOffice 2.x.
>
> For the test I used a copy of KOffice trunk from yesterday (25. august)
> from which I managed to build a running version.
>
> The documents I used for the test is a series of documents that I
> produced last year for another test (a test concerning ODF-OOXML
> interoperability that I made for the Danish IT Authority, IT- &
> Telestyrelsen). The test documents are all produced with OpenOffice.org
> 2.4 on Windows. There is no guarantee that the documents actually comply
> with any of the ISO ODF standards - they are just "OpenOffice
> documents". Anyway, since OpenOffice.org is in widespread use, testing
> on these documents represent a realistic scenario.

Hi Finn,

Are these documents available anywhere?  It would be good to have them as a 
small test suite so that we could run the tests regularly.  If they are only 
possible to run manually, that would be a good way for somebody who isn't a 
developer to help KOffice.

I think I know other parties who may be interested in them as well.

> The test is in no way a complete test of all the functionality in the
> ODF standard, but represents what the Danish IT Authority refers to as
> "the Functionality Ceiling": a certain subset of document
> functionalities found in all modern word processors which a number of IT
> managers i the Danish public sector has agreed upon as being of special
> importance for document exchange between word processors.

Very interesting.  Does this mean that if we pass these tests, that KOffice 
would be eligible for use in the Danish public sector? 

> Here are the results:
>
> 1.1 Colored text: pass.
> 1.2 Bold text: pass.
> 1.3 Italic text: pass.
> 1.4 Hyperlink: pass.
> 1.5 Soft line break: pass.
> 1.6 Manual line break: pass.
> 1.7 Text adjustment: pass.
> 1.8 White-space characters: pass.
> 1.9 Tabulators: pass.
> 1.10 Background color: pass.
> 1.11 Headline styles: pass.
> 1.12 Underscored text: pass.
> 2.1 Page header: fail. No page header is shown.

This is somewhat surprising.  Page headers are implemented and last time I 
tested them, they worked fine.  Maybe it's something in the loading.

> 2.2 Page footer: pass.
> 3.1 Page numbering: pass.
> 3.2: Input field, tab "Functions" in OpenOffice.org fields window: fail.
> No field data is shown.
> 3.3: Input field, tab "Variables" in OpenOffice.org fields window: fail.
> No field data is shown.
> 3.4: User field, tab "Variables" in OpenOffice.org fields window: fail.
> No field data is shown.

Can you explain a little more what these fields mean?

> 4.1 Footnotes: acceptable. Footnote is shown, however layout is
> completety changed.

This is surprising as well, but for another reason:  I didn't think that 
footnotes were implemented. :-)

> 5.1 Numbered lists: pass.
> 5.2 Bulleted lists: pass.
> 6.1 Encapsulated binary objects ("OLE objects"): fail. Object is not shown.

What kind of object did you test with 6.1?  

> 6.2 Encapsulated spreadsheet in ODF format: fail. Object is not shown.
> 7.1 Text adjustment in table cell: pass
> 7.2 Merged table cells: pass.
> 7.3 Cell and table boundaries: pass.
> 7.4 Table background color: pass.
> 8.1 Pictures: fail. Picture is not shown.

This is very surprising.  That's definitely a regression.

> 8.2 Text adjustment around picture: could not be tested.

Why not?

> 8.3 Text box: fail. Textbox not shown.
> 8.4 Text adjustment around text box: could not be tested.
> 8.5 Drawing objects: fail. No drawing object shown.

This should also work.  It would be interesting to analyze these files a bit 
more in depth.

> 9.1 Manual page break: pass.
> 10.1 Table of contens: fail. Table of contents are not shown.
> 11.1 Comments: fail. Comments are not shown.

Indeed.  Both of these are not implemented.

> 11.2 Changes management: fail. Registered changes are not shown.

This should be new in 2.1 but was just recently merged.  Hopefully the test 
will pass before 2.1 is released.

> This is just for your information; I don't know if the data is useful
> for you or not. Anyway, if you can manage to have a "pass" in all these
> areas when you release KOffice 2.1, I think KOffice 2.1 should have a
> fair chance of quick adoption :-)

As the others have said as well, thank you so much for this work.  We would be 
interested in working with you in the future as well if you find it valuable.  
It's always good to work with people "out there" so to speak.

Inge Wallin

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]