Using Calc v6.4.5.2(x64) on Windows 10
I have a sheet which has 6 different CF rules on columns B through G (see Screenshot by Lightshot)
However, upon copying this sheet to a new sheet, these ranges are all combined into one single CF rule (see Screenshot by Lightshot)
Any ideas on how to stop this from happening?
Here’s a simple example showing this behavior demo.ods
Are the settings (mode, conditions, conditional styles …) the same for the 5 merged CF ranges?
In short: is the CF for B2:G10 on the second sheet acting as expected for the complete range?
If not, attach the file with the first sheet. (Confidential data removed.).
Otherwise: A possible simplification was applied. You may also merge the CF ranges for the first sheet.
From my perspective a bug to be reported at Bugzilla - this extends the “duplicate”-property evaluation to the whole range, while it has been defined as a per-column condition.
@Lupp – No. I need each individual column to check for duplicates, not the entire range of columns. I cannot attach the original file (personal information). However, this can be easily duplicated with any data. I’ve attached an example file. If you copy Sheet1 it destroys the individual column-wise formatting.
may be
Formula is COUNTIF(B$2:B$10;B2)>1 for Range B2:G10 is doing what you are looking for and does not show the problem.
See your modified sample file: Q306671-Demo-Modified.ods, which has a copy of Sheet1 in Sheet1_3 using the Conditional Formatting as above (this is a workaround for the bug).
@anon73440385 – This is an acceptable workaround for my application. Thanks! I agree, however, with your suggestion that this is a bug to report. I’ll get on that.
There were problems for a long time with fragmentation of CF. When this was fixed by implementing re-unification, The conditions comparing elements of the whole range obviously would have needed a special treatment avoiding the mergering of ranges having formally the same condition but applying to different ranges.
See https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95295 .
(I took part in the discussion there, but didn’t notice this problem.)
Probably unification wasn’t the appropriate approach, and avoiding unnecessary fragmentation should have been in the focus.
Anyway the implemented kind of re-unification must not be applied to range-sensitive conditions, and, of course, not “onCopySheet”.