Re: [office-formula] ADDRESS/INDIRECT - slight OOo/Excel differences

[Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com>]

Hi David,

On Wednesday, 2007-01-31 14:31:07 -0500, David A. Wheeler wrote:

> There are a few slight differences in ADDRESS/INDIRECT between OOo and
> Excel.  OOo's versions don't support R1C1 references, which means that
> the number of arguments in ADDRESS are different.  (The syntax for
> sheet names varies slightly too.)

> Should we support R1C1?  If so, we probably should support Excel's format.

OOo will support R1C1 and the different ADDRESS/INDIRECT styles in
future, so it's best to be prepared.

> More generally:
> * Should we use OOo's format?
> * Should we use Excel's?
> * Should we use OOo syntax for ADDRESS and INDIRECT, and have other
>   functions (say, ADDRESSE and INDIRECTE) that are
>   Excel/Ecma-compatible?  This one adds more functions, but is the
>   best for helping everyone transition to OpenFormula.

We need different functions, anything else does not work. I suggest
ADDRESS_E and INDIRECT_E or similar, something like INDIRECTE might be
too easily confused, in this case it is even identical with a French
translation of INDIRECT.

  Eike

-- 
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets.  --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.