From calligra-devel  Fri Mar 16 03:45:01 2012
From: Sebastian Sauer <mail () dipe ! org>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 03:45:01 +0000
To: calligra-devel
Subject: Re: Project Proposal for Calligra
Message-Id: <4F62B73D.7020409 () dipe ! org>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=calligra-devel&m=133186967819493
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--===============5166422218333234499=="

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============5166422218333234499==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------020006010604090207090102"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020006010604090207090102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 03/15/2012 11:17 PM, jigar raisinghani wrote:
> Hi,
>           Sebastian, one thing i personally like about Calligra 
> Sheets(Tables) is its "IMPORT" feature. eg.  you have  10 tables in a 
> document, Calligra Sheets extracts and opens it in 10 different 
> sheets. This is awesome. But supposing you have to make minor changes 
> in 3-4 tables, you would not like to export it or create new files. 
> Rather than exporting it, we could just let the changes be reflected 
> back to the original file itself. I guess extending the 
> functionalities of SHAPE to create streams and wait for streams to 
> save back the data would also be a nice method as Friedrich suggested.

Yes, absolute agree there :)

> As far as Calligra Words is concerned, i guess extending the 
> functionalities of FLAKE/SHAPE would be better option as of now. My 
> idea of opening tables in Calligra words using Calligra Sheets was 
> basically to allow user to implement all the functions of Calligra 
> Sheets using Calligra Words. But this is only possible if Calligra 
> Sheets allows the changes to be reflected back directly.As Friedrich 
> suggested, having ruler plugins for SHAPE would be best.
>
> Moreover the above ideas of just extending the FLAKE/SHAPE to 
> implement the desired features in Calligra Sheets and Calligra Tables 
> would not disturb the concept of FLAKE/SHAPE.
>
> This was just a very rough idea of what i would like Calligra Sheets 
> and Calligra Words to have and not my actual GSOC Proposal.

Ah, good. Note that my objections are not related to such a feature. The 
thing is that the proposal does not name with any word how that the goal 
should be achieved. It names the target but not the way that would lead 
to it. So, we may agree on the target but without having any clue what 
the way would be we may not there since it could mean that you plan to...
a) Write an external Python script the user needs to call and that 
unzip's the embedded ODS, calls Tables and if Tables exists zip's the 
ODS again and puts it into the outer format.
b) Extend flake so the loading+saving works in a way described greatly 
described by Friedrich or
c) Hack an import-export plugin for Calligra Tables/Sheets to allow 
import/export.

There are huge differences between those 3 examples and we, means our 
Calligra mentors, would certainly like to know which way to plan to 
drive. That is imho just a very basic requirement to be able to "judge" 
your proposal. When we have no clue then the possibility is just very 
high that it's rejected (means not chosen) cause we just do not know 
what the proposal really is about. I think very less of us would chose a 
black-box without knowing what's inside when there are alternates that 
make very well clear what may come out of the gsoc and how our users and 
developers would benefit.

Hope that makes more clear where I see the problem with the current 
proposal. So, I would suggest to add details how that should be done. 
Just show us that you already have an idea and how that idea may look 
like. Also imho it would be rather useful to add a time-table where you 
list what milestones you like to achieve within the gsoc-time. I would 
suggest to have a look at other proposals like 
http://wiki.scribus.net/canvas/GSoC_2011_Tables_Proposal or 
http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&m=123809166413909 or 
http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&m=123817532032221 or 
http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/4ztGlXShEYwLSl9jPzX7 .

Best regards
Sebastian


--------------020006010604090207090102
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
    <title></title>
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
    On 03/15/2012 11:17 PM, jigar raisinghani wrote:
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAAGhiLL0WKCyBpJd0=YPfxyuCSH0=LbeJXFtPhv__sYqtqEWoA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      Hi,
      <div>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Sebastian, one thing i personally like about
        Calligra Sheets(Tables) is its "IMPORT" feature. eg. &nbsp;you have
        &nbsp;10 tables in a document, Calligra Sheets extracts and opens it
        in 10 different sheets. This is awesome. But supposing you have
        to make minor changes in 3-4 tables, you would not like to
        export it or create new files. Rather than exporting it, we
        could just let the changes be reflected back to the original
        file itself. I guess extending the functionalities of SHAPE to
        create streams and wait for streams to save back the data would
        also be a nice method as Friedrich suggested.</div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Yes, absolute agree there :)<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAAGhiLL0WKCyBpJd0=YPfxyuCSH0=LbeJXFtPhv__sYqtqEWoA@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div>As far as Calligra Words is concerned, i guess extending the
        functionalities of FLAKE/SHAPE would be better option as of now.
        My idea of opening tables in Calligra words using Calligra
        Sheets was basically to allow user to implement all the
        functions of Calligra Sheets using Calligra Words. But this is
        only possible if Calligra Sheets allows the changes to be
        reflected back directly.As Friedrich suggested, having ruler
        plugins for SHAPE would be best.&nbsp;</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>Moreover the above ideas of just extending the FLAKE/SHAPE to
        implement the desired features in Calligra Sheets and Calligra
        Tables would not disturb the concept of FLAKE/SHAPE.</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>
        This was just a very rough idea of what i would like Calligra
        Sheets and Calligra Words to have and not my actual GSOC
        Proposal. <br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Ah, good. Note that my objections are not related to such a feature.
    The thing is that the proposal does not name with any word how that
    the goal should be achieved. It names the target but not the way
    that would lead to it. So, we may agree on the target but without
    having any clue what the way would be we may not there since it
    could mean that you plan to...<br>
    a) Write an external Python script the user needs to call and that
    unzip's the embedded ODS, calls Tables and if Tables exists zip's
    the ODS again and puts it into the outer format.<br>
    b) Extend flake so the loading+saving works in a way described
    greatly described by Friedrich or<br>
    c) Hack an import-export plugin for Calligra Tables/Sheets to allow
    import/export.<br>
    <br>
    There are huge differences between those 3 examples and we, means
    our Calligra mentors, would certainly like to know which way to plan
    to drive. That is imho just a very basic requirement to be able to
    "judge" your proposal. When we have no clue then the possibility is
    just very high that it's rejected (means not chosen) cause we just
    do not know what the proposal really is about. I think very less of
    us would chose a black-box without knowing what's inside when there
    are alternates that make very well clear what may come out of the
    gsoc and how our users and developers would benefit.<br>
    <br>
    Hope that makes more clear where I see the problem with the current
    proposal. So, I would suggest to add details how that should be
    done. Just show us that you already have an idea and how that idea
    may look like. Also imho it would be rather useful to add a
    time-table where you list what milestones you like to achieve within
    the gsoc-time. I would suggest to have a look at other proposals
    like <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.scribus.net/canvas/GSoC_2011_Tables_Proposal">http://wiki.scribus.net/canvas/GSoC_2011_Tables_Proposal</a> or
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&amp;m=123809166413909">http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&amp;m=123809166413909</a> or
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&amp;m=123817532032221">http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&amp;m=123817532032221</a> or
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/4ztGlXShEYwLSl9jPzX7">http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/4ztGlXShEYwLSl9jPzX7</a> .<br>
    <br>
    Best regards<br>
    Sebastian<br>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------020006010604090207090102--

--===============5166422218333234499==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
calligra-devel mailing list
calligra-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel

--===============5166422218333234499==--