Hi,I guess,In your case from p:ph you are getting the information about your placeholdersif it is subTitle or ctrTitle and from slidelayout.xml you are getting informationabout that.And the formatting information(colour,font size etc)will be in theparticular run property.(a:rPr) in slide1.xml
But if you don't have p:ph then in slide1.xml in the particular p:spyou have to search for lvl attribute and according to the value you haveto go to slidelayout and search for the particular level.
Mallika
Hi,
I guess if you don't specify any formatting(change the font size,color etc) for your textin the presentation document,it will take the default value and there will be no informationin the rPr tag.Change the formatting of you text and you can see the formatting informationin the corresponding rPr tag.
MallikaBiswas:Hi, I guess if you don't specify any formatting(change the font size,color etc) for your textin the presentation document,it will take the default value and there will be no informationin the rPr tag.Change the formatting of you text and you can see the formatting informationin the corresponding rPr tag. Mallika
For the second question, the "Title Slide" layout used in the example does
not have a placeholder with bullet level text (p:txBody) defined for it.
It has a:lstStyle defined. You can see the difference in the definitions
of slideLayout1.xml ("Title Slide") and slideLayout2.xml ("Title and
Content").
1. slideLayout1.xml
<p:sp>
<p:nvSpPr>
<p:cNvPr id="3" name="Subtitle 2"/>
<p:cNvSpPr>
<a:spLocks noGrp="1"/>
</p:cNvSpPr>
<p:nvPr>
<p:ph type="subTitle" idx="1"/>
</p:nvPr>
</p:nvSpPr>
<p:spPr>
<a:xfrm>
<a:off x="1371600" y="3886200"/>
<a:ext cx="6400800" cy="1752600"/>
</a:xfrm>
</p:spPr>
<p:txBody>
<a:bodyPr/>
<a:lstStyle>
<a:lvl1pPr marL="0" indent="0" algn="ctr">
<a:buNone/>
<a:defRPr>
<a:solidFill>
<a:schemeClr val="tx1">
<a:tint val="75000"/>
</a:schemeClr>
</a:solidFill>
</a:defRPr>
</a:lvl1pPr>
<a:lvl2pPr marL="457200" indent="0" algn="ctr">
</a:lvl2pPr>
<snip - continues through a:lvl9pPr>
</a:lstStyle>
<a:p>
<a:r>
<a:rPr lang="en-US" smtClean="0"/>
<a:t>Click to edit Master subtitle style</a:t>
</a:r>
<a:endParaRPr lang="en-US"/>
</a:p>
</p:txBody>
</p:sp>
2. slideLayout2.xml
<p:cNvPr id="3" name="Content Placeholder 2"/>
<p:ph idx="1"/>
<p:spPr/>
<a:lstStyle/>
<a:pPr lvl="0"/>
<a:t>Click to edit Master text styles</a:t>
<a:pPr lvl="1"/>
<a:t>Second level</a:t>
<a:pPr lvl="2"/>
<a:t>Third level</a:t>
<snip - continues through a:pPr lvl="5">
Hi Adamm,
Not sure whether you get this mesage since it's after long time back.
Did you resolve the problem. I am in exactly same situation, I am too writing a parser, and stuck with same issue for past weeks. So, its helps if you could let me know any resolution that you find.
Thank in advance,
Vins
Just in case these forums do get looked at.
I have exactly the same problem = trying to construct a deterministic process for resolving formatting defaults.
I am particularly confused as to when the defPPR in a lstStyle gets used - as in all cases mentioned it seems the lvl1pPR supplies the defaults.
I found a very helpful page today (published on Feb 11 2013) listing many corrections and explanations of OOXML behaviour in MS Office.
msdn.microsoft.com/.../ee908652(v=office.12).aspx.
This lists 1873 pages of corrections to the OOXML specification - many of which directly contradict the specification.
The main implication of these pages seems to be that the OOXML specification cannot be relied on to determine the behaviour of a document when used by MS Office.
If you find a discrepancy it may well be that Office is not obeying the specification - or is using it's own defaults.
And if you rely on the specification to write conforming documents to be read by MS Office you may get surprising behaviour.
After spending over a month trying to determine default formatting values using the specification I am on the point of giving up as it seems that whatever I deduce may fail in future when implmenting a specific case that I have not compared to MS Office behaviour.
It seems one of the main purposes of the standard = to enable documents to be read in 10+ years when all related software has perished = is now invalid.
We will have to revert to scribing documents on parchment to ensure anything is readable in 1000 years.