Re: [office-formula] Semantics

["Tomas Mecir" <mecirt@gmail.com>]

On 3/1/06, Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com> wrote:
> > I realise that I may be playing a devil's advocate here a bit :)
> What for? Those functions work on numbers, text isn't a number. I wish
> all function parameters / operands to numeric operators would behave
> like that..

Sounds a bit like someone being lazy -hum-. ;) Y'know, I think this
could be considered that geeky approach, which we wanted to avoid. Do
the users want to care about whether something that obviously must be
a number, isn't a number due to it being in a text-formatted cell, or
something like that ?

> > Isn't this what OpenFormula has been doing so far ? With tests being
> > adjusted for OOo to pass them and all ...
>
> Well, thanks for the flowers, but with the big player I wasn't referring
> to OOo ;-)

Well I think OOo's approach of formulas is staying compatible with MS
Office, so hey. Of course, I could be terribly wrong.

> I don't consider ignoring text in a range to be SUM'ed dirty. Not at
> all.

Even if the text is "3" ?

> You're oversimplifying things. We have many areas where different
> applications currently do not agree.

Maybe. We'll surely get to discussing those.

/ Tomas