RE: [office-formula] Sections 4.8 Reference and 5.8 References?

+1 on Eike's analysis.  Yes, this is about resolution of references, not
their syntax.  And the reference should be corrected.  (Looks like it failed
to be renumbered when section 2 was inserted.)

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Eike Rathke [mailto:] 
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 09:13
To: 
Subject: Re: [office-formula] Sections 4.8 Reference and 5.8 References?

Hi,

On Monday, 2010-11-08 12:39:27 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote:

> > > Cell positions in a cell cuboid/rectangle/strip can resolve to empty
> > > cells (section 3.7).
> > 
> > Definitely 5.8 material.
> 
> Ok, agreed.

This was confusing, "(section 3.7)" is part of the sentence, 3.7 is
"Basic Limits" and a bad section number, that should be "(section 4.7)"
instead, which is "Empty Cell". I don't think the sentence should be
moved to 5.8 "References" instead, as 5.8 is about syntax, not
evaluation. Mentioning empty cells clarifies that a cell strip may
include cells without value.

  Eike

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