Greetings!
I have an unrelated question on the wording of Sort_index in
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-4157Sort_index: First, the column or row of Data_source that is at the index specified in the first value of Sort_index (name it "A" here) is sorted in the order specified in the first value of Sort_order. Indexing starts with 1 in the column furthest to the left or the row furthest up in Data_source. In case Sort_index has more than one value, next all columns or rows with the same value in column or row "A" are sorted in the column or row specified as the second value in Sort_index, in the order specified in the second value of Sort_order, and so on. If Sort_order has fewer values than Sort_index, the last value of Sort_order is used repeatedly.
Default value is 1.
Isn't the second sentence a duplicate of the first?
First, the column or row of Data_source that is at the index specified in the first value of Sort_index (name it "A" here) is sorted in the order specified in the first value of Sort_order.
vs.
Indexing starts with 1 in the column furthest to the left or the row furthest up in Data_source.
Yes?
In case Sort_index has more than one value, next all columns or rows with the same value in column or row "A" are sorted in the column or row specified as the second value in Sort_index, in the order specified in the second value of Sort_order, and so on. If Sort_order has fewer values than Sort_index, the last value of Sort_order is used repeatedly.
But that's an awkward way to say that values are sorted by the corresponding Sort_index value.
Try:
If Sort_index is an array, all columns and rows are sorted by the corresponding Sort_order value. If Sort_order is shorter than Sort_index, the last value of Sort_order is used.
Hope everyone is having a great weekend!
Patrick