From: jerome <rom...@ya...> - 2012-01-27 09:38:27
|
> I don't much like the idea of getting > rid of a format just > because it is momentarily developer-orphaned, etc. > Surely that situation has arisen before; gramps coped. +1 Note, I have no problem to use pure ASCII characters (like into python console). I just wanted to say that I migrated some old RTF files generated in the past into ODF file and that I rather use PDF file formats when I want to send a textual report generated by Gramps. > I especially don't like Windows users to feel they are > being slighted, now that Windows is actively maintained. Windows users are not all using RTF file formats as main one into textual reports! I assume that some users with Chinese locale (or other Asian and east european countries) do no use RTF file format on textual reports, even under Windows OS ? Tim asked for some improvements on a file format which was sometimes patched but never really reviewed. Like for LaTex, experts are welcome because report environment aims to use/support it. It does not sound like a problem with file format used under Windows OS, rather time and knowledges for a good review according to last specifications. Maintenance is also time consumer and Gramps supported AbiWord file format in the past, which has been replaced by ODF (as Abiword supports this file format)[1]! I guess it was what Benny said about ODF support on most desktop/office applications - but I am not Benny !- or cloud like google docs. I also agreed with him about cost for reading or generated file formats: Gramps should not force to buy a program for reading our generated reports. LibreOffice, NeoOffice, OpenOffice, KOffice, GnomeOffice, etc ... are supporting ODF and sometimes RTF. Most are available on all platforms. So, text formating should be compliant with last specifications. Thank you, Tim ! [1] http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/ODT-format-can-we-drop-Abiword-and-KWord-now-td1793527.html Jérôme --- En date de : Ven 27.1.12, Paul Franklin <pf....@gm...> a écrit : > De: Paul Franklin <pf....@gm...> > Objet: Re: [Gramps-devel] Problem with RTFDoc > À: gra...@li... > Date: Vendredi 27 janvier 2012, 7h45 > I don't much like the idea of getting > rid of a format just > because it is momentarily developer-orphaned, etc. > Surely that situation has arisen before; gramps coped. > > I especially don't like Windows users to feel they are > being slighted, now that Windows is actively maintained. > > Why can't we do something simple for RTFDoc, so that > it stays in 3.4, then we'll have a year to decide what to > do (or maybe its problems will be fixed by then, etc.)? > > We could change the code which adds an image to > just add the text string "(photo)" the way AsciiDoc does, > for instance, in order to buffer the string (for now). > > I could make the argument that since it used to work > in the past, that any present problems are just bugs, > thus deserving of fixing. > > Throwing the baby out with the bath water seems extreme. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft > developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, > CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you > subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |