Re: [office] Next set of public comments for review (#18-#35)

"David A. Wheeler" <>
wrote on 06/02/2008 06:47:48 PM:

> I believe #24 is done.  This involved handling references to

> empty cells; new text in section 4 (Types) clarifies what happens
in

> these cases.

> 

> Basically, there isn't a special type called the empty type.  

> Instead, there is

> a type "Reference", which _may_ refer to empty cells or
ranges that include

> empty cells.  What happens to empty cells depends on the required
types

> and implicit conversion rules, as defined in section 4.  E.G.,
if you use a

> function that requires "Number", but instead is given a
reference to an

> empty cell, then the reference is converted to the number 0.  If
the

> function requires

> a NumberSequence, all the empty cells are ignored when creating a

> NumberSequence

> (and just like strings, NumberSequences can be 0 length).

> 

Is there a distinction between an empty cell and a
non-existent cell?  For example, if an implementation supports only
16,000 columns, A-IV, a common spreadsheet limitation, then what happens
when a spreadsheet formula has a range that extends beyond column IV?  Is
that an error?  Or are these cells empty? Do we call this out anyplace?

I think that was the thrust of the original comment
#24 -- non existent cells.

-Rob