[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 18:26:46
[Download RAW message or body]

Yes!

Note that I have already said that a CDATA is not sufficient!
I also have already said that this format do not need to be KWord's 
internal format! It does not even need to be KWord's/KOffice's native 
format!

One advantage is that the whole file is a pure XML file! One setContent and 
your whole document is accessible through a QDomDocument [DOM]. That is 
standard, not KTarGz! (Okay, gzip is a standard, but not tar as far as I 
know, even if it is widely used! Is there a tar functionnality in Java for 
example?)
The second advantage is that with some CSS2 magic, you can have a preview 
of the text (no images) in any browser supporting XML+CSS2. Think of the 
advantage when in future many browsers can read correctly XML+CSS2, even on 
platforms where KOffice is unknown!

However, I think that right now is not the right time to change the file 
format for KWord, as the new KWord is already on the way. We first need a 
really working new KWord, then much later we can think about alternative 
file formats.
I never had the idea to remove now the KTarGz system form KOffice. In my 
first mail, I have put the sentence about a unique XML file between 
<OFFTOPIC> and I have put in the sentence the phrase: "in far future!"

References:
[DOM] Document Object Model (Level 1): http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-DOM-Level-1 
(Latest Level 1 version)

-----Original Message-----
From:	Thomas Zander [SMTP:zander@planescape.com]
Sent:	Monday, February 12, 2001 6:32 PM
To:	koffice-devel@max.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de; 
clavoi14@po-box.mcgill.ca
Subject:	Re: KWord status

On Monday 12 February 2001 16:08, Christian Lavoie wrote:
> On Monday 12 February 2001 08:59, David Faure wrote:
> > On Monday 12 February 2001 13:12, Nicolas GOUTTE wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > XML allows to put a picture inside an XML file ??
> > The QDom* classes certainly doesn't support that !
>
> Not wanting to state the obvious, but the XML specification clearly says
> that CDATA (or whatever that is spelt) can contain anything you feel 
like.

So, you actually want the file that contains the text to also contain the
pictures?

What if you have a document with 50 pictures, each some 2Mb. You want to
parse that data ?
--
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Koffice-devel mailing list
Koffice-devel@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

_______________________________________________
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]