Created attachment 64224 [details] Libreoffice table created and how it looks with Calligra. the table borders are not displayed correctly using Calligra Words, they told me that LO use 1px for the borders and calligra draws the borders... so that is the reason to get a very very swift line in the table... I want if this could be working good with other software because that is what OpenDocument are, a standard. I have attached an image of how Calligra make looks the Libreoffice table borders.
This is the bug opened at Calligra Bug report https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303494
"Tools->Options..->View->Use anti-aliasing" Cheers to C. Boemann. Should it be closed now?
Hi Valek, what i mean it looks fine in LibreOffice, but it doesn't looks fine on Calligra. I have antialiasing enabled, thanks Valek.
Hi again, what they told me of a reason why LO fails was "they may do anti aliasing in general, but not for their table borders, and that is why it looks incorrect in writer" Hopes this help.
so i guess the problem here is not that LO doesn't do anti-aliasing of borders: it does that, and does it wrongly, which makes borders look fatter than they should, see e.g. bug 53287. the problem is that OOo has traditionally interpreted a border width of 1 twip/0.05 pt specially as a "hairline", which (if my nonexistent knowledge of all things graphics doesn't betray me) means it renders these as solid 1 device pixel wide lines. unfortunately ODF doesn't allow to express a "hairline" border as such, hence OOo/LO also write 0.05pt (or equivalent 0.002cm) in ODF for these. apparently Calligra sees this differently, interprets the width literally and creates a barely visible gray line: http://bugsfiles.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=72570 whose bug that is is not clear to me :)
Dear Bug Submitter, This bug has been in NEEDINFO status with no change for at least 6 months. Please provide the requested information as soon as possible and mark the bug as UNCONFIRMED. Due to regular bug tracker maintenance, if the bug is still in NEEDINFO status with no change in 30 days the QA team will close the bug as INVALID due to lack of needed information. For more information about our NEEDINFO policy please read the wiki located here: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/FDO/NEEDINFO If you have already provided the requested information, please mark the bug as UNCONFIRMED so that the QA team knows that the bug is ready to be confirmed. Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team
(In reply to comment #5) > so i guess the problem here is not that LO doesn't do anti-aliasing of > borders: > it does that, and does it wrongly, which makes borders look fatter > than they should, see e.g. bug 53287. > > the problem is that OOo has traditionally interpreted a border width > of 1 twip/0.05 pt specially as a "hairline", which (if my nonexistent > knowledge of all things graphics doesn't betray me) means it renders > these as solid 1 device pixel wide lines. > > unfortunately ODF doesn't allow to express a "hairline" border as such, > hence OOo/LO also write 0.05pt (or equivalent 0.002cm) in ODF for these. > > apparently Calligra sees this differently, interprets the width literally > and creates a barely visible gray line: > > http://bugsfiles.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=72570 > > whose bug that is is not clear to me :) efectively, as far as I understand from them, they explain me what you have expressed, the borders are drawn. Probably this need to be discussed in the maillist.
Dear Bug Submitter, Please read this message in its entirety before proceeding. Your bug report is being closed as INVALID due to inactivity and a lack of information which is needed in order to accurately reproduce and confirm the problem. We encourage you to retest your bug against the latest release. If the issue is still present in the latest stable release, we need the following information (please ignore any that you've already provided): a) Provide details of your system including your operating system and the latest version of LibreOffice that you have confirmed the bug to be present b) Provide easy to reproduce steps – the simpler the better c) Provide any test case(s) which will help us confirm the problem d) Provide screenshots of the problem if you think it might help e) Read all comments and provide any requested information Once all of this is done, please set the bug back to UNCONFIRMED and we will attempt to reproduce the issue. Please do not: a) respond via email b) update the version field in the bug or any of the other details on the top section of FDO