Jonathan, Actually Vince’s (the OP) original question was about 1+ (###) ###-#### not +1 (###) ###-####.
He also asked about (###) ###-#### as an alternative. Both were addressed several responses ago including an incorrection in regards to those solutions. Steve Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 26, 2022, at 9:39 PM, toki <toki.kant...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 25/02/2022 19:58, Alan B wrote: >> Correction >> After applying the recommended format, (###) ###-####, and entering >> 1234567890 the displayed value will be (123) 456-7890. > > Your original question was asking about +1 (###) ###-####, not (###) ###-####. > > jonathon
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.apache.org
