<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - After inserting Fixed Date, and saving in DOC format, the date is not fixed anymore" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100961#c13">Comment # 13</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - After inserting Fixed Date, and saving in DOC format, the date is not fixed anymore" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100961">bug 100961</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:mikekaganski@hotmail.com" title="Mike Kaganski <mikekaganski@hotmail.com>"> Mike Kaganski</a> <pre>(In reply to Aron Budea from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=100961#c12">comment #12</a>) > I checked what's possible in Word, and it appears Word inserts fixed dates > as a piece of text, and nothing else. Perhaps it's just an unsupported type > in DOC formats. However, in that case possibly the old behavior was the > correct one, which turned fixed dates into a piece of text - the fieldness > is removed, but the date remains fixed. Saving a test document to DOCX results in correct roundtrip (wrt this specific issue that is about const-ness of fields); Word also opens the generated DOCX with fields in it, having const values. Then, you can save the DOCX to DOC using Word, and get a DOC with const fields - so the DOC format supports the const date/time fields. But opening the resulting DOC (generated by Word) using LO gives non-const date/time fields - so it's at least import filter issue.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>