Hi Andreas,
On Friday, 2007-02-16 09:17:27 -0700, Andreas J Guelzow wrote:
> If we don't have a generic NUMBERTEXT function (and I follow your
> argument of this being very difficult to specify) I don't think we
> should have a BAHTTEXT function either. Virtually all arguments you make
> also apply to a potential plethora of individual functions and I don't
> see how Thai is in any way special.
BAHTTEXT exists in Excel and we try to be interoperable with Excel where
reasonable. Which is the reason to be in for quite a few functions we
otherwise would had dropped. I don't insist on having BAHTTEXT in ODFF,
I'd also be fine without, OOo would store it as COM.MICROSOFT.BAHTTEXT
then.
So, as BAHTTEXT seems to give unnecessary headaches, let's drop it.
Eike
--
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets. --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.
