As the title says, whatever i set the style pane to (usually Hierarchical) at some point, random as far as i can tell, it will set itself to something else, also random, as far as i can tell. I sem to remember from the 2.3 changelog taht this particular problem had been fixed. Am i delusional, ot am i simply the only one with this problem? It occurs both with 2.3.1 on my Win XP PC and with the latest Ubuntu version of OOo, the problem seems to be more severe with the latter.
Does anyone know a solution to this problem or is it simply the umpteenth bug we just have to live with?
Style pane is not preserving it's setting
Style pane is not preserving it's setting
Has your question been answered? Then please add [solved] to the title of your thread.
My pet peeve, No support for international ordinal numbering
please vote
Er is nu ook een Nederlandstalig forum!
OOo 3.0.X on Ms Windows XP + Opensuse 11.1
My pet peeve, No support for international ordinal numbering
please vote
Er is nu ook een Nederlandstalig forum!
OOo 3.0.X on Ms Windows XP + Opensuse 11.1
Re: Style pane is not preserving it's setting
You've encountered at least one of the remaining bugs regarding the Stylist filter:
Stylist filter does not remember the hierarchical filter
Stylist filter not remembered when opened from Apply Styles
Stylist filter does not remember the hierarchical filter
Stylist filter not remembered when opened from Apply Styles
Re: Style pane is not preserving it's setting
Off topic but relevant to the subject.
I'm on a mission. I'm an editor and writer, and am observing the erroneous apostrophe egregiously proliferating.
In case English isn't the reader's first language, that means a particular use of the apostrophe is popping up everywhere, but it's being used in error. I just used it correctly there.
I'm curious about where the confusion comes in. Do schoolteachers teach its misuse, out of their own misconception? It is an exception to an otherwise stable rule about forming possessives, but how can people be confused about the exception? It seems so clear to me. I'm honestly wondering what thought train leads to putting an apostrophe where it does not belong, thus changing the meaning of the entire sentence.
It's = It is. This is a standard contraction form, in which the apostrophe replaces a letter. Therefore, with the apostrophe, the subject of this thread is: Style pane is not preserving it is setting. Now I want a comma after preserving, to be grammatically correct... regardless, the sentence makes no sense.
Its = belonging to it. Therefore, without the apostrophe, the subject of this thread would be correct: Style pane is not preserving the setting it is given.

I'm on a mission. I'm an editor and writer, and am observing the erroneous apostrophe egregiously proliferating.
In case English isn't the reader's first language, that means a particular use of the apostrophe is popping up everywhere, but it's being used in error. I just used it correctly there.
I'm curious about where the confusion comes in. Do schoolteachers teach its misuse, out of their own misconception? It is an exception to an otherwise stable rule about forming possessives, but how can people be confused about the exception? It seems so clear to me. I'm honestly wondering what thought train leads to putting an apostrophe where it does not belong, thus changing the meaning of the entire sentence.
It's = It is. This is a standard contraction form, in which the apostrophe replaces a letter. Therefore, with the apostrophe, the subject of this thread is: Style pane is not preserving it is setting. Now I want a comma after preserving, to be grammatically correct... regardless, the sentence makes no sense.
Its = belonging to it. Therefore, without the apostrophe, the subject of this thread would be correct: Style pane is not preserving the setting it is given.
Cheers!
---Fox
OOo 3.2.0 Portable, Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
---Fox
OOo 3.2.0 Portable, Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit