Libreoffice integration: Character formatting issue

[Steggen]

Hi all,
I experienced the following bug during using citing in Libreoffice.
My Jabref (bitex format) entry has chemical formulas in the title that I wrote as e.g.

Magnetic domain properties of {FeBO\textsubscript{3}}

This is correctly dislpayed in Jabref in both, table view and entry preview. When citing the article in a Libreoffice document the subscript (same happens to superscripts) is malformed:

The malformed subscript has the following character format:

After selecting the subscript and twice clicking the Subscript-icon in Libreoffice the subscript is displayed correctly. The character settings are now:

Now "automatic" is activated. This should be the default.

JabRef version 5.1 on Windows 10

[X] I have tested the latest development version from http://builds.jabref.org/master/ and the problem persists

[Siedlerchr]

I could reproduce this problem. The 101% Value is defined here;

jabref/src/main/java/org/jabref/logic/openoffice/OOUtil.java

Lines 228 to 242 in f85c081

	if (formatting.contains(Formatting.SUBSCRIPT)) {
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT,
	(byte) -101);
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT_HEIGHT,
	(byte) 58);
	} else if (formatting.contains(Formatting.SUPERSCRIPT)) {
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT,
	(byte) 101);
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT_HEIGHT,
	(byte) 58);
	} else {
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT,
	(byte) 0);
	xCursorProps.setPropertyValue(CHAR_ESCAPEMENT_HEIGHT,
	(byte) 100);

The api only defines CharEscapement and CharEscapementHeight.
I don't know the Auto value is set internally or if there is some magic

CharEscapement
specifies the percentage by which to raise/lower superscript/subscript characters.
Negative values denote subscripts and positive values superscripts.
https://api.libreoffice.org/docs/idl/ref/servicecom_1_1sun_1_1star_1_1style_1_1CharacterProperties.html#a1335d73b4d11f4a48b01115bac73c083

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!