'Re: kword html filter'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List: koffice-devel
Subject: Re: kword html filter
From: dep <dep () drippingwithirony ! com>
Date: 2002-02-12 3:03:14
[Download RAW message or body]

begin  Nicolas Goutte's  quote:
| I would prefer that you would not touch the HMTL export filter.

well, i wasn't proposing to change it per se; if i were able to strip 
it down so as to provide attributes only, but no font stuff, i would 
have submitted it as a possible filter with a different name, such as 
"HTML-stripped". a completely different filter.

| I am not against discussing how it should work but I have something
| against destroying its structure.
|
| The filter perhaps does not suit you but, even in its current
| state, it is useful. I also do not deny that the resulting file
| size is too big but I am just exporting what KWord is telling me.
| Simplifying the file is on my to-do list.

i'm not doubting your motives in the slightest, nor disparaging your 
work, which is clearly comprehensive, useful, and good. instead, my 
observation is that the dialog in the kword-1.1.1 html filter was 
more useful and flexible than the one in the current cvs. of course, 
for my purposes the ideal would be for there to be something between 
the full boat and no formatting -- preservation of attributes, 
primarily and . this kind of thing is especially 
useful to people who submit things for publication, particularly web 
publication.

| The reasons why the filters is now like this is mainly to due to
| the KWord Export Filter Library. It was much easier to drop two
| modes before converting. I choose (X)HTML + CSS, because the user
| feedback was to have as much possible of the KWord document. This
| is only possible with CSS.
|
| However, I can again split the filter. Document-structure-only is
| quite simple, as it is just the same without CSS.
|
| And if you do not need underline, I can do a "strict" mode, where
| the result is (X)HTML strict without CSS. You would not have 
| but you would also not have . And it would be quite easy to
| explain to people, as it is a specification. It would be much
| easier than to explain what the old "Direct" mode did or did not.

i do not know how difficult this would be for you; the result would be 
absolutely ideal for me -- i don't typically use underline, and 
mentioned it earlier because i considered it was probably an 
attribute, which upon inspection of the code in your filter i have 
learned it isn't. i don't know how much others would miss it. out of 
curiousity, how would embedded links square with such a mode? (i'm 
presuming that it would be necessary from time to time to open the 
resulting file in an editor to format something; i'm just curious as 
to whether links would be such an occasion, or whether they are 
considered to be content, as they were in kde-1.1.1, which didn't 
strip them but which also didn't treat them as links.)

| PS.: may be I have misunderstood you. If you want to do it only on
| your local machine and do not want to commit it to CVS, the easiest
| for you would be to completely remove any use of CSS. You would
| have the old "Document structure only" mode. The dialog can also be
| removed if you want, you have to replace by fixed values all the
| functions for getting the dialog properties.

my thought was that if i came up with something that worked well, i 
might pass it along for inspection and, if it were deemed of merit, 
possible inclusion as a *separate* filter. after having spent 
yesterday chopping away, i can guarantee you that i have arrived at 
nothing i'd be happy to use here, never mind show to anyone else. but 
at bottom, i just wanted to cook up something to do my work here. i 
even sought a qt-3 version of quanta, thinking that i could export 
and then open the result in quanta to clean it up. there is no qt-3 
version of quanta that i can find at the moment, though.

thanks very much for the information and for news of the possibility 
that the situation will improve. is there some way i can help?
-- 
dep
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 