diff options
author | Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.com> | 2019-03-18 21:40:15 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.com> | 2019-03-19 09:07:15 +0100 |
commit | 00ac19068de5e120d1620a719aa64f1203c639ae (patch) | |
tree | a1ea31d1cf81442d8926cae9a3db185ee657dc7d | |
parent | 192baae9fee4ddaa7758f2396b79a1da8e2b7a89 (diff) |
tdf#120548 sw ApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering: fix handling of font color
Regression from commit b2c1474c1dc93b69f0ede03fc5c9ab496c669955
(SwTxtNode::IsIgnoredCharFmtForNumbering: ignore RES_CHRATR_COLOR,
2014-11-20), where the problem was that unconditionally ignoring or not
ignoring the font color is not correct.
Re-examining the test document from the above commit, it has an explicit
font color set in the numbering, while this bugdoc doesn't have it.
So make applying the paragraph mark font color to the numbering
conditional if the numbering already has a color set, this makes both
cases work correctly.
Change-Id: I43a6dec7d3a77689e2acbdc9d3671e79a9c4cac8
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/69400
Tested-by: Jenkins
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.com>
-rw-r--r-- | sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx | bin | 0 -> 13745 bytes | |||
-rw-r--r-- | sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx | 8 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx | 10 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx | 3 |
4 files changed, 17 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 000000000000..60943645e939 --- /dev/null +++ b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/data/tdf120548.docx diff --git a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx index 7a03744d46f2..3ea6916e2839 100644 --- a/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx +++ b/sw/qa/extras/ooxmlimport/ooxmlimport2.cxx @@ -103,6 +103,14 @@ DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(testGroupShapeFontName, "groupshape-fontname.docx") getProperty<OUString>(getRun(getParagraphOfText(1, xText), 1), "CharFontNameAsian")); } +DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(testTdf120548, "tdf120548.docx") +{ + // Without the accompanying fix in place, this test would have failed with 'Expected: 00ff0000; + // Actual: ffffffff', i.e. the numbering portion was black, not red. + CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL(OUString("00ff0000"), + parseDump("//Special[@nType='PortionType::Number']/SwFont", "color")); +} + DECLARE_OOXMLIMPORT_TEST(test120551, "tdf120551.docx") { auto nHoriOrientPosition = getProperty<sal_Int32>(getShape(1), "HoriOrientPosition"); diff --git a/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx b/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx index d0cad7b2569c..9138a35eacdc 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/text/txtfld.cxx @@ -412,7 +412,9 @@ SwLinePortion *SwTextFormatter::NewExtraPortion( SwTextFormatInfo &rInf ) * character than can be configured to be shown). However, in practice MSO also uses it as direct formatting * for numbering in that paragraph. I don't know if the problem is in the spec or in MSWord. */ -static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( SwFont* pNumFnt, SwTextFormatInfo& rInf, const IDocumentSettingAccess* pIDSA ) +static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(SwFont* pNumFnt, SwTextFormatInfo& rInf, + const IDocumentSettingAccess* pIDSA, + const SwAttrSet* pFormat) { if( !pIDSA->get(DocumentSettingId::APPLY_PARAGRAPH_MARK_FORMAT_TO_NUMBERING )) return; @@ -447,6 +449,8 @@ static void checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( SwFont* pNumFnt, SwTextFor { if (SwTextNode::IsIgnoredCharFormatForNumbering(pItem->Which())) pCleanedSet->ClearItem(pItem->Which()); + else if (pFormat && pFormat->HasItem(pItem->Which())) + pCleanedSet->ClearItem(pItem->Which()); if (aIter.IsAtEnd()) break; @@ -552,7 +556,7 @@ SwNumberPortion *SwTextFormatter::NewNumberPortion( SwTextFormatInfo &rInf ) con if( pFormat ) pNumFnt->SetDiffFnt( pFormat, pIDSA ); - checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( pNumFnt.get(), rInf, pIDSA ); + checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(pNumFnt.get(), rInf, pIDSA, pFormat); if ( pFormatFnt ) { @@ -608,7 +612,7 @@ SwNumberPortion *SwTextFormatter::NewNumberPortion( SwTextFormatInfo &rInf ) con if( pFormat ) pNumFnt->SetDiffFnt( pFormat, pIDSA ); - checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering( pNumFnt.get(), rInf, pIDSA ); + checkApplyParagraphMarkFormatToNumbering(pNumFnt.get(), rInf, pIDSA, pFormat); // we do not allow a vertical font pNumFnt->SetVertical( pNumFnt->GetOrientation(), m_pFrame->IsVertical() ); diff --git a/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx b/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx index a30ee18233b3..b7b80cbfb23c 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/txtnode/thints.cxx @@ -1760,7 +1760,8 @@ void SwTextNode::DelSoftHyph( const sal_Int32 nStt, const sal_Int32 nEnd ) bool SwTextNode::IsIgnoredCharFormatForNumbering(const sal_uInt16 nWhich) { - return (nWhich == RES_CHRATR_UNDERLINE || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_COLOR || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_BACKGROUND || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_ESCAPEMENT); + return (nWhich == RES_CHRATR_UNDERLINE || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_BACKGROUND + || nWhich == RES_CHRATR_ESCAPEMENT); } //In MS Word, following properties of the paragraph end position won't affect the formatting of bullets, so we ignore them: |