[Upstream] Math equation editor: "newline" fails after symbols

Created attachment 52281
math_newline_issue.odt

Downstream bug may be found at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/281053

1) lsb_release -rd
Description: Ubuntu 11.10
Release: 11.10

2) apt-cache policy libreoffice-writer
libreoffice-writer:
  Installed: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Candidate: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

apt-cache policy libreoffice-math
libreoffice-math:
  Installed: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Candidate: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

3) What is expected to happen in LibreOffice Writer via the Terminal:

cd ~/Desktop && wget https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/281053/+attachment/2417117/+files/math_newline_issue.tar.gz && file-roller -h math_newline_issue.tar.gz && cd math_newline_issue && lowriter -nologo math_newline_issue.odt

is no upside down question marks are presented in the Math formulas.

4) What happens is the upside down question marks are present erroneously due to "newline" command. If "newline" is preceded or followed by some characters (as +, -, =, which are often needed), some error marks "¿" are obtained, and perhaps only a single line if displayed (it depends on the character and its relative position to "newline"). Examples :

a+b_ij = newline = c+d # single line; error mark
a+b_ij newline = c+d # two lines; missing "="; error mark
a+b_ij newline + c+d # correct behaviour !! The "+" sign does fine after newline...
a+b_ij + newline c+d # ... but not before: single line, error mark here
a+b_ij = newline c+d # single line, error mark. The "=" sign does bad whether after or before newline

Created attachment 52281
math_newline_issue.odt

Downstream bug may be found at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/281053

1) lsb_release -rd
Description: Ubuntu 11.10
Release: 11.10

2) apt-cache policy libreoffice-writer
libreoffice-writer:
  Installed: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Candidate: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

apt-cache policy libreoffice-math
libreoffice-math:
  Installed: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Candidate: 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.4.3-3ubuntu2 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ oneiric/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

3) What is expected to happen in LibreOffice Writer via the Terminal:

cd ~/Desktop && wget https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/281053/+attachment/2417117/+files/math_newline_issue.tar.gz && file-roller -h math_newline_issue.tar.gz && cd math_newline_issue && lowriter -nologo math_newline_issue.odt

is no upside down question marks are presented in the Math formulas.

4) What happens is the upside down question marks are present erroneously due to "newline" command. If "newline" is preceded or followed by some characters (as +, -, =, which are often needed), some error marks "¿" are obtained, and perhaps only a single line if displayed (it depends on the character and its relative position to "newline"). Examples :

a+b_ij = newline = c+d # single line; error mark
a+b_ij newline = c+d # two lines; missing "="; error mark
a+b_ij newline + c+d # correct behaviour !! The "+" sign does fine after newline...
a+b_ij + newline c+d # ... but not before: single line, error mark here
a+b_ij = newline c+d # single line, error mark. The "=" sign does bad whether after or before newline

[This is an automated message.]
This bug was filed before the changes to Bugzilla on 2011-10-16. Thus it
started right out as NEW without ever being explicitly confirmed. The bug is
changed to state NEEDINFO for this reason. To move this bug from NEEDINFO back
to NEW please check if the bug still persists with the 3.5.0 beta1 or beta2 prereleases.
Details on how to test the 3.5.0 beta1 can be found at:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugHunting_Session_3.5.0.-1

more detail on this bulk operation: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RFC-Operation-Spamzilla-tp3607474p3607474.html

[This is an automated message.]
This bug was filed before the changes to Bugzilla on 2011-10-16. Thus it
started right out as NEW without ever being explicitly confirmed. The bug is
changed to state NEEDINFO for this reason. To move this bug from NEEDINFO back
to NEW please check if the bug still persists with the 3.5.0 beta1 or beta2 prereleases.
Details on how to test the 3.5.0 beta1 can be found at:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugHunting_Session_3.5.0.-1

more detail on this bulk operation: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RFC-Operation-Spamzilla-tp3607474p3607474.html

Reproducible in:
lsb_release -rd
Description: Ubuntu precise (development branch)
Release: 12.04

apt-cache policy libreoffice-impress
libreoffice-impress:
  Installed: 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3
  Candidate: 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Reproducible in:
lsb_release -rd
Description: Ubuntu precise (development branch)
Release: 12.04

apt-cache policy libreoffice-impress
libreoffice-impress:
  Installed: 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3
  Candidate: 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3
  Version table:
 *** 1:3.5.0~beta2-2ubuntu3 0
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

reproduced in 3.6.0 master on Fedora 64 bit
3.4.3 and 3.5.0 beta on Windows XP 32 bit

reproduced in 3.6.0 master on Fedora 64 bit
3.4.3 and 3.5.0 beta on Windows XP 32 bit

Math always tries to get a complete expression from a single line[1]. i.e. it needs something standing after "=" or "+" at the same line. So the following formula will work:

a+b_ij = {} newline {} = c+d

I think it is not a bug... Opinions?

[1] Formula parsing code: starmath/source/parse.cxx

Math always tries to get a complete expression from a single line[1]. i.e. it needs something standing after "=" or "+" at the same line. So the following formula will work:

a+b_ij = {} newline {} = c+d

I think it is not a bug... Opinions?

[1] Formula parsing code: starmath/source/parse.cxx

Ivan Timofeev, thank you for taking a look at this. Using as a WORKAROUND:
{} newline {}

is acceptable in the all the cases mentioned in the Description. However, this report is about addressing how the use of newline does not have caveats as per the documentation:
http://help.libreoffice.org/Math/Format
http://help.libreoffice.org/Math/Entering_Line_Breaks

So, any of the original of the examples provided in the Description are valid and should work, but not all do.
It would be beneficial for newline be changed to work according to the expectation mentioned in the Description.
As well, having newline's idiosyncrasies documented in the meantime would be nice for others who fall down the same hole.

Ivan Timofeev, thank you for taking a look at this. Using as a WORKAROUND:
{} newline {}

is acceptable in the all the cases mentioned in the Description. However, this report is about addressing how the use of newline does not have caveats as per the documentation:
http://help.libreoffice.org/Math/Format
http://help.libreoffice.org/Math/Entering_Line_Breaks

So, any of the original of the examples provided in the Description are valid and should work, but not all do.
It would be beneficial for newline be changed to work according to the expectation mentioned in the Description.
As well, having newline's idiosyncrasies documented in the meantime would be nice for others who fall down the same hole.

(In reply to comment #5)
> Using as a WORKAROUND:
> {} newline {}
> is acceptable in the all the cases mentioned in the Description.

Not always "{} newline {}". You use {} when you need to provide the missing operand of a binary operator. For example,

a+b_ij newline = c+d # left-hand side is missing at the second line
a+b_ij newline {} = c+d # add {} - OK

a+b_ij = newline c+d # right-hand side is missing at the first line
a+b_ij = {} newline = c+d # add {} - OK

And from my point of view, the requirement - "provide all operands, otherwise there will be the flipped question mark" - is simply awful, it would be a great improvement to get rid of it. newline's behavior will be much more intuitive.

(In reply to comment #5)
> Using as a WORKAROUND:
> {} newline {}
> is acceptable in the all the cases mentioned in the Description.

Not always "{} newline {}". You use {} when you need to provide the missing operand of a binary operator. For example,

a+b_ij newline = c+d # left-hand side is missing at the second line
a+b_ij newline {} = c+d # add {} - OK

a+b_ij = newline c+d # right-hand side is missing at the first line
a+b_ij = {} newline = c+d # add {} - OK

And from my point of view, the requirement - "provide all operands, otherwise there will be the flipped question mark" - is simply awful, it would be a great improvement to get rid of it. newline's behavior will be much more intuitive.

Ivan Timofeev committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=f52138deee9e129d0566f06d1d2138b6b159d16a

fdo#41739: Math: do not skip "newline" on error

Ivan Timofeev committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=f52138deee9e129d0566f06d1d2138b6b159d16a

fdo#41739: Math: do not skip "newline" on error

So - newline works everywhere now. That should reduce the number of confused users. :)

Thanks!

So - newline works everywhere now. That should reduce the number of confused users. :)

Thanks!

Ivan Timofeev committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=5f80687188db3a29fb0c3a5fe587aeeb3e13dccd

Revert "fdo#41739: Math: do not skip "newline" on error"

Sorry, I have reverted the commit, it causes awful hangs. The newline token
needs to be handled in many other places, but I really fear to break the parser
again in a more subtle way.

Ivan Timofeev committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=5f80687188db3a29fb0c3a5fe587aeeb3e13dccd

Revert "fdo#41739: Math: do not skip "newline" on error"

Sorry, I have reverted the commit, it causes awful hangs. The newline token
needs to be handled in many other places, but I really fear to break the parser
again in a more subtle way.

As this bug is not assigned and there has been no activity by the original patch author for months I'm moving this back to NEW.

As this bug is not assigned and there has been no activity by the original patch author for months I'm moving this back to NEW.

** Please read this message in its entirety before responding **

To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.

There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.

If you have time, please do the following:

Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.0.4 or later)
   https://www.libreoffice.org/download/

If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior

the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System

Please DO NOT

Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case)

If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:

1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3)

http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

2. Test your bug

3. Leave a comment with your results.

4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo";

4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword

Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa

Thank you for your help!

-- The LibreOffice QA Team This NEW Message was generated on: 2015-12-20

Still occurs in 5.2.2.2.0 (Arch Linux x86-64).

** Please read this message in its entirety before responding **

To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.

There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.

If you have time, please do the following:

Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/

If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.

If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.

Please DO NOT

Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not
appropriate in this case)

If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword

Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa

Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!

Warm Regards,
QA Team

MassPing-UntouchedBug

Reproducible verbatim to the Description in:
Version: 5.4.3.1 (x64)
Build ID: 32c8895c6cae21571f364dbb059f419a743ee44d
CPU threads: 8; OS: Windows 6.19; UI render: GL;
Locale: en-US (en_US); Calc: group
Windows 10 x64

IMHO, this is NOTABUG, because it's expected behavior of Formula editor (Math).

Regina, what do you think? Is there info about this behavior in ODF standart?

Dear Christopher M. Penalver,

To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.

There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.

If you have time, please do the following:

Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/

If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.

If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.

Please DO NOT

Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not
appropriate in this case)

If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword

Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa

Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!

Warm Regards,
QA Team

MassPing-UntouchedBug

Your starmath syntax is just wrong. The command = needs valid expressions at both sides, newline indicates end of expression, it is not an expression on itself.
a+b_ij = {} newline {} = c+d

(In reply to dante19031999 from comment #19)
> Your starmath syntax is just wrong. The command = needs valid expressions at
> both sides, newline indicates end of expression, it is not an expression on
> itself.
> a+b_ij = {} newline {} = c+d

Agree. That is how we handle the NEWLINE command. As pointed out in comment 4 and comment 5 above. And, attempt to modify parser behavior were not viable.

And this becomes a documentation issue against describing behavior of NEWLINE on formula layout [1][2]. What should be said about SM use of NEWLINE command and its effect on parsing starmath/mathml syntax for rendering of formula(s) to canvas?

=-ref-=
[1] https://help.libreoffice.org/latest/en-US/text/smath/guide/newline.html?DbPAR=MATH#bm_id1295205
[2] https://help.libreoffice.org/latest/en-US/text/smath/01/05040000.html?DbPAR=MATH#bm_id3148730