[gnumeric-web] Typos and layout.
- From: Morten Welinder <mortenw src gnome org>
- To: commits-list gnome org
- Cc:
- Subject: [gnumeric-web] Typos and layout.
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:19:23 +0000 (UTC)
commit 0c329737e84d7f2b586630f656f02f9e898bb0e6
Author: Morten Welinder <terra gnome org>
Date: Thu Apr 16 20:19:04 2015 -0400
Typos and layout.
announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html | 32 +++++++++++++++--------------
index.html | 2 +-
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html b/announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html
index e318558..8027695 100644
--- a/announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html
+++ b/announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html
@@ -40,21 +40,23 @@
</ul>
<p>As part of our testing we check that the ODF, XLSX, and
Gnumeric files we produce are valid according to the relevant
- xml schema.</p>
- <p>For Gnumeric files we produce the schema.</p>
- <p>For XLSX there is an official schema which we use with a
- few fixes so Excel can read our files. (We consider the
- format to be defined by what XLSX writes.)</p>
- <p>For ODS the situation is more problematic. We appear to be
- the first to release a schema for the ODS files we produce.
- That is mildly shocking -- several spreadsheets have ODS as
- their primary format, yet no-one seem to be validating the
- files they produce! There is an official schema for the
- format without extensions. That is fine, except that no-one
- uses that format because there are lots of fairly basic
- things that cannot be expressed in the format without
- extensions.</p>
-
+ xml schema.</p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>For Gnumeric files we produce the schema.</li>
+ <li>For XLSX there is an official schema which we use with a
+ few fixes so Excel can read our files. (We consider the
+ format to be defined by what XLSX writes.)</li>
+ <li>For ODS the situation is more problematic. We appear to be
+ the first to release a schema for the ODS files we produce.
+ That is mildly shocking -- several spreadsheets have ODS as
+ their primary format, yet no-one seem to be validating the
+ files they produce!
+ There is an official schema for the
+ format without extensions. That is fine, except that no-one
+ uses that format because there are lots of fairly basic
+ things that cannot be expressed in the format without
+ extensions.</li>
+ </ul>
<p>Details of changes by contributor:</p>
<ul>
<li>Andreas
diff --git a/index.html b/index.html
index e1e5586..054f927 100644
--- a/index.html
+++ b/index.html
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
<span class="month">Apr</span>
<span class="year">2015</span>
</span>
- Gnumeric 1.12.21
+ Gnumeric 1.12.22
</h2>
<p><a href="announcements/1.12/gnumeric-1.12.22.html">Gnumeric
1.12.22 is out</a>. Get it
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]