The alphabetic switch argument has no documented ST_NumberFormat equivalent. This shades doubt upon the value of the switch argument, or else a potential hole in ST_NumberFormat values.

Create a ST_NumberFormat value that matches the alphabetic switch argument or (better) suppress the need for the switch argument, either by using an ST_NumberFormat type in a proper XML notation for number formats in the context of fields, or simply by suppressing it from the OOXML proposal altogether.

page 1501, line 0 Part 4, Section 2.16.4.3 General formatting

te

Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment FR-0087 (Modified: 2007-11-29) Agreed; the following change will be made to Part 4, section 2.16.4.3, page 1501: alphabetic Formats a numeric result as one or more occurrences of an lowercase alphabetic Latin character. Value 1 results in the letter a, value 2 results in the letter b, and so on up to value 26, which results in the letter z. For values greater than 26, 26 is repeatedly subtracted from the value until the result is 26 or less. The result value determines which letter to use, and the same letter is repeated for each time 26 was subtracted from the original value. [Example: =52 \* alphabetic results in "zz" as subtracting 26 from 52 one time, produces results in the value 26, which is represented by the letter z.. end example] Corresponds to an ST_NumberFormat enumeration value of lowerLetter . Similar Comments: BR-0016 ,