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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    RE: KWord status
From:       Nicolas GOUTTE <nicog () snafu ! de>
Date:       2001-02-12 13:12:39
[Download RAW message or body]

>From:	Marko Samastur [SMTP:markos@elite.org]
>Sent:	Sunday, February 11, 2001 7:09 PM
>To:	koffice-devel@max.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de
>Subject:	Re: KWord status
>
>On sobota 10. februar 2001 22:24, Nicolas GOUTTE wrote:
>>
>> In the meantime, I think too that the least thing KWord needs now is
>> a new file format. By the way, XHTML+CSS2 cannot help much, as they
>> are not covering many parts of KWord (e.g. text columns or
>> integrating other KParts).
>
>I agree with this point. One of the things I'd like to do, but haven't
>started because I was unexpectedly called to do my civil service couple
>of months ago, is an openoffice import and export filter. But more I
>think about it, more it seems wiser to just adopt the damn thing.

You still need a filter first. When it is fully working, then you can 
intergrate it in KWord and you can use the filter you have written to load 
and save today's KWord file format.

>Is there any special reason against that now?
>
>> With every new extension of KWord's <FORMAT> tag, you would break
>> existing filters!
>
>I disagree or at least I'm not able to see why is that. I do agree that
>it would break badly written filters, but a good one should just ignore
>what it doesn't understand in any case.

I think I will do it another way. Any unknown id of <FORMAT> will be 
considered an error! XML permits it!
Not doing so would permit files out of specification to be written in the 
export file format. With an error, I can at least have a bug report back 
saying that something is wrong.

>> >> 2. External style sheets
>> >> Personnaly I dislike to take out the style sheet from the
>> >> document. I understand why HTML/XHTML does it but I do not
>> >> understand why KWord
>.....
>> I have thought that template files were made for this. Additionaly
>> the formatting can always be changed paragraph by paragraph,
>> character by character if it is forbidden to change the styles.
>
>No. External style sheets were made at least for two reasons. First one
>is to more easily apply same style on different documents or even force
>it when it's needed.


>The other one is to make document (content) management easier, because
>it divides content from its representation. This makes it easier to
>transform it, when needed, in the way you want.
>
>Implemented correctly can make much easier to offer the same content in
>print, on web, over phone...

Okay, I understand. That is exactly why CSS2 was created (screen, print, 
braille, audio...) and that HTML/XHTML STRICT forbids character by 
character formatting (but a few).

>Personally, I fail to see the good side of internal style sheets
>because you already are using tar files for things like pictures, but I
>can easily see the good side of it.

For me, inside tar is not an external style sheet. In-tar style sheet could 
even help filter developers, as for example for AbiWord you need/have style 
sheets after the text but in HTML+CSS2 or in Rich Text Format you need/have 
the style sheets before the text.

>> >info in a markup-independent style. And format it the way you want
>> > at
>>
>> publishing
>>
>> >time, but thats in the far future..
>
>No. For many this far future is now. Btw, this is THE reason why
>Microsoft Office is starting to use XML for its files.

You have (greatly?) misunderstand me! I meant fully XML file. No tar! 
XML-namespaces are used as replacement for the tar file. In *one* XML file 
you would have the whole document with any style sheet, embeded object or 
picture you want. The advantage is that you can use XML and SGML tools 
then. The main inconvient is that you have to code any binary data.
However, in the meantime, I think that it is better to make it as a 
separate filter. If people would find this useful, we could then always 
choose what to do with it afterwards.

>> I start to understand the reason. It is the same reason, why HTML in
>> general prefers external style sheets.
>
>Yes.

No!
HTML prefers style sheets out of it mainly because:
- you have only to download one style sheet files for one site (not the 
equivalent in each HTML file).
- CSS2 is not HTML! It is used in conjungtion with HTML. So to emphasize 
this difference, the specification prefers to have separate files.
- CSS2 are problematic in XHTML. You have to embed them in a CDATA section. 
Probably knowing this in advance, the coder of HTML have chosen to prefer 
the external way!
- external sheet files are easier for the end user to modify! (Bigger 
characters on screen, displayed fonts, better audio rendering... You can 
modify it if you need it!)

>> May be there should be a tool in KWord to take style sheets from a
>> document and to copy it to another. MS Word 97 has such a function
>> where you can copy style sheets from the document to its template or
>> vice-versa. For KWord, I suggest that such a tool should work also
>> between two documents.
>
>Obviously (to me) this solves only my first stated reason for external
>style sheets and not the second one.
>
>If you have external style sheets, you don't need such a tool. You just
>have to copy style sheet files.

If you have in-tar style sheets, you still need such a tool! (Or at least 
it would be nice to have it!)

>Kind regards,
>
>	Marko

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

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