> Personally, I fail to see how useful it will be for a user to have a table
> with many rows (features) and with many many columns (filters).

I'm thinking of one table for each filter (import and export together).
For example, one table can list KWord features which are supported under
HTML export and import at the same time. Allows versioning, e.g
WordPerfect 5 and 6/7/8 at different columns. Such table can be made
similar for a group of KWord filters, i.e items in the rows are similar,
but not necessary list all filters at once.

Beside, putting them in separate categories (character, paragraph, page
properties and so on) makes it easy for the developers to track features.
Or maybe for users who wonder which things are supported and which aren't.

> I do not know how many features KWord or AbiWord has. However the number of
> filters is easier to calculate. AbiWord has around 16 import filters and 18
> export filters. One day may be we will have as much for KWord... We have
> already 11 import filters and 7 export filters for KWord. All this makes the
> table for KWord alone already huge.

With a number of active filter developers less than 5, I doubt we can
create (or even maintain) many filters easily. Admittedly, Abiword has
more people working on filters.

Anyway, I'm working on WordPerfect export filter at the moment. I can't
commit it due to feature freeze, so it goes for KWord 1.3. Just to note
that not only Abiword has it :-)

Last but not least, I feel that term such "KWord WordPerfect Export
Filter" is simply confusing. Wouldn't be better to call it "WordPerfect
Exporter for KWord" ? Or any other name ? The same goes for all filters.
Comments ?

:: Ariya ::


_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel