Created attachment 71764 [details] ods file which works in 3.5 but not 4.0 beta a Problem description: when I open my .ods spreadsheet (my school mark book) in 4.0 beta 1 there is no conditional formatting, but in 3.5 there is lots of conditional formatting Steps to reproduce: 1. open the attached file in 3.5 (everything works as expected, e.g. enter 'M' in cell CA7) 2. open the attached file in 4.0 Current behavior: no conditional formatting is working or listed under CF -> Manage Expected behavior: conditional formatting should still be present and working NB: I have tried creating a simple document with only one conditional format in 3.5 and then opening in 4.0 beta 1 and this worked as expected. Operating System: Windows XP Version: 4.0.0.0.beta1
Created attachment 71779 [details] seems to work for me
Well, I'm not very fond with attachment in bugzilla... My comment is that I've tried with WinXP-32 and LiBo 4.0beta1, and it works, also in CF -> manage I see all the conditional formatting as you can see in the attached screenshot (n.b. there you see the filename has "aaa_" prefix but has been renamed from file explorer, not re-saved).
NOT reproducible with parallel installation of "LOdev 4.0.0.0.beta1 - GERMAN UI / German Locale [Build ID: 87906242e87d3ddb2ba9827818f2d1416d80cc7)]" {tinderbox: @6, pull time 2012-12-06} on German WIN7 Home Premium (64bit) with separate /4 User Profile for Master Branch. I open the document form LibO Start Center, see lots of CF in menu 'Format -> CF -> Manage', and it works fine for AA7 and T7
Created attachment 71787 [details] Screenshot comparison But during my research for "Bug 58499 - FILEOPEN particular LibO 3.5 .ods: Bold formatting for several cells lost" I found CF problems: Example: Cell AN7 (see attached screenshots)
I agree that the conditional formatting works today!
@john.pratt@cantab.net: But what's with my observation in Comment 4? If you can confirm, please open a new bug with reference to this one and add me to CC!
(In reply to comment #6) > @john.pratt@cantab.net: > But what's with my observation in Comment 4? If you can confirm, please open > a new bug with reference to this one and add me to CC! I see what you mean, but am not convinced this is a bug. I am playing and will shortly write a new bug/feature request. Sorry I didn't realise quite what the problem was the first time I replied.