libwpg-devel — libwpg development

Re: [Libwpg-devel] Positioned objects in WPD files

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> Hello, good people, just to give you head up about the fact that we are
> now kind of able to get the positioned objects position and size right
> inside a WPD file. Moreover, the images are converted as editable ODG
> objects which I find really cool. All these things are happening in CVS
> HEAD version of libwpd, libwpg and writerperfect. Not that we are too
> close of libwpd-0.9.x and libwpg-0.2.x series, just to know that using
> head we can do quite cool things.
>
> You can read the account of my latest work on this feature here:
> http://fridrich.blogspot.com/2007/10/ito-sweet-ito.html

Fantastically cool! Really a good job, Fridrich!

BTW, what do you think about my recent proposal to split the stream library?



Regards,

Ariya

[Libwpg-devel] Positioned objects in WPD files

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people, just to give you head up about the fact that we are
now kind of able to get the positioned objects position and size right
inside a WPD file. Moreover, the images are converted as editable ODG
objects which I find really cool. All these things are happening in CVS
HEAD version of libwpd, libwpg and writerperfect. Not that we are too
close of libwpd-0.9.x and libwpg-0.2.x series, just to know that using
head we can do quite cool things.

You can read the account of my latest work on this feature here:
http://fridrich.blogspot.com/2007/10/ito-sweet-ito.html

As for features, I am still thinking about trying to write a parser and
converter for the old-type WP equations (able to produce them with WP 8
for Linux). The newer versions are mainly putting the equations into a
WMF file that is then put into a WPG that is then put into a WPD :-) And
since we are getting the WPGs well including the binary objects in them,
this one is not really a problem as long as the application that is
viewing the resulting document is able to read a WMF.

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHF2AKu9a1imXPdA8RAuHkAJsFa+crPgolfR0Lbl5rCvhW04WVfwCeL5XU
TcxAp6/FKFFQbG+8KZ2ek/Y=
=/yj1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg-0.1.1???

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

Fridrich,

> You have been just added to my home project.

Thanks!

> Please, quality and security first, I have a (bad) reputation to safeguard :-)

I will keep this mind.

> Now, the thing is easy. You just upload a tarbal and a spec file for
> that package. The best would be if you tried to make a SPEC file and
> build an RPM on your machine. For older distributions, one will have to
> link with the KDE:Qt repository too, because we need quite recent QT4. I
> will try to bug our OOo SuSE packager whether he can throw some light my
> side. I don't know how busy he will be, so timeframe cannot be promised,
> but will do my best.

On my own machines (OpenSUSE 10.2 and 10.3), I have built the RPMs
without problem. I guess it is then a matter of uploading the files to
the build service and see whether it builds cleanly on other distros.
I'll wait until I make its first 0.1 release.

> BTW: I branched and destabilised HEAD just now :-) The good branch is
> STABLE-0-1-0 and will produce libwpg-0.1.x. Head is now producing
> libwpg-0.2.x and apart of the fact that it can eat all the nice food you
> blog about, it can eat children and other protected species. So, consume
> with moderation and precaution :-)

So, you branched it quickly :-)

While we're on that:

(1) does make it sense if we include simplified ODGGenerator (which
outputs e.g. context.xml only) also inside libwpg (so that wpg2odg is
just a thin wrapper)?

(2) Also, what is the plan regarding OOO stuff inside wpg2odg module?
Is it going to disappear because you have integrated in Novell edition
of OOo afterall?


Regards,

Ariya

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg-0.1.1???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ariya,

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> Fridrich, I saw that you're using OpenSUSE build service. I want to do
> the same for building Perfectspot, however since you have your build
> service nicely up and running already (even for many different
> distros), would it make sense if you can try to build Perfectspot
> there, and then add me (username: 'ariya') as the user of your home
> project? I know it might be not that easy since it uses CMake, but I
> guess it is better to have the wpg stuff consolidated in one place
> rather one in yours and one in mine. What do you think?

You have been just added to my home project. Please, quality and
security first, I have a (bad) reputation to safeguard :-)

Now, the thing is easy. You just upload a tarbal and a spec file for
that package. The best would be if you tried to make a SPEC file and
build an RPM on your machine. For older distributions, one will have to
link with the KDE:Qt repository too, because we need quite recent QT4. I
will try to bug our OOo SuSE packager whether he can throw some light my
side. I don't know how busy he will be, so timeframe cannot be promised,
but will do my best.

BTW: I branched and destabilised HEAD just now :-) The good branch is
STABLE-0-1-0 and will produce libwpg-0.1.x. Head is now producing
libwpg-0.2.x and apart of the fact that it can eat all the nice food you
blog about, it can eat children and other protected species. So, consume
with moderation and precaution :-)

Cheers

Fridrich

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHCpgJu9a1imXPdA8RAgPwAKCEavJAWhWLu5Xb/HzkHzNvbU7bZACdF/zw
IXuWRLrgjnS9gP1rNj8CjIo=
=D5j3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg-0.1.1???

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> Hello, good people. It is not like there is a lot of new features added
> for the while. The QA action of Sum1 made 0.1.0 quite OK, so for the
> while there are not bugs reported. And also, the WPG importer in
> ooo-build version of OO.o was released officially only recently, so
> reports from Ubuntu, Debian, OpenSuse,... will start to come only little
> by little. Nevertheless, there has been some work done on build system
> where we are now able to cross-compile the library and the tools
> completely on win32. Moreover, some fixes were needed to make libwpg
> (and wpg2odg) build with the upcoming gcc 4.3. These changes are now in CVS.

Fantastic and thank you for that work!

> Nevertheless, I was reflecting about making a 0.1.1 release to ship also
> these small fixes to that different distros that use already the gcc 4.3
> do not have to distribute patched versions. In the same token I was
> thinking to branch the library with a branch tag STABLE-0-1-0 that would
> then contain only API & ABI compatible fixes and so, HEAD could have new
> features like for instance the text support... Ariya, specially you,
> what is your take on this?

I couldn't agree more with that.

As soon as you branch, I'd like to also fix and add few API
documentation here and there. This would not break ABI at all.

In addition, I'll prepare Perfectspot so that it's ready for its first release.

Fridrich, I saw that you're using OpenSUSE build service. I want to do
the same for building Perfectspot, however since you have your build
service nicely up and running already (even for many different
distros), would it make sense if you can try to build Perfectspot
there, and then add me (username: 'ariya') as the user of your home
project? I know it might be not that easy since it uses CMake, but I
guess it is better to have the wpg stuff consolidated in one place
rather one in yours and one in mine. What do you think?


Regards,

Ariya

[Libwpg-devel] libwpg-0.1.1???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people. It is not like there is a lot of new features added
for the while. The QA action of Sum1 made 0.1.0 quite OK, so for the
while there are not bugs reported. And also, the WPG importer in
ooo-build version of OO.o was released officially only recently, so
reports from Ubuntu, Debian, OpenSuse,... will start to come only little
by little. Nevertheless, there has been some work done on build system
where we are now able to cross-compile the library and the tools
completely on win32. Moreover, some fixes were needed to make libwpg
(and wpg2odg) build with the upcoming gcc 4.3. These changes are now in CVS.

Nevertheless, I was reflecting about making a 0.1.1 release to ship also
these small fixes to that different distros that use already the gcc 4.3
do not have to distribute patched versions. In the same token I was
thinking to branch the library with a branch tag STABLE-0-1-0 that would
then contain only API & ABI compatible fixes and so, HEAD could have new
features like for instance the text support... Ariya, specially you,
what is your take on this?

Cheers

Fridrich
- --
Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHB3R1u9a1imXPdA8RAhRgAJ9f0tREPjgJoxw0+zv9/HjHLUGGBgCfQsO1
FTDg/DOXIP8cxWRxlikIYBQ=
=gLCM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Libwpg-devel] ATTN: wpg2odg-0.1.0 released

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people,

This is just to tell you that we did today an initial release of
wpg2odg, a nice tool written by Ariya Hidayat and your servant. This
tool converts WordPerfect Graphics files to OpenDocument Graphics format.

The source tarball, source rpm along with a win32 binary can be found at
our download page http://sourceforge.net/projects/libwpg. Users that run
either different flavours of Fedora or SuSE, download this package
(along with the recently released libwpg) from my openSuSE build service
repository:
	http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/fstrba/

It is a known issue that the converted ODG files are quite big if an
embedded bitmap or other binary object is present in the original WPG
file. This is due mainly to the fact that we are not compressing, only
storing the different streams of the zip-file. Once the document is
loaded into OpenOffice.org and resaved again, its size will diminish in
a considerable way.

Enjoy and consume carelessly

Cheers

Fridrich Strba
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG3GAvu9a1imXPdA8RAhyNAJsFYhD/l3lQ0bXN5SVViRGaOPa4mACfc9bI
Ba/fy0B0C56bPu54InaIfKA=
=VpC8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] ATTN: libwpg-0.1.0 is out of the door

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> Not without a lot of joy, I come to you announcing that early this week
> a happy event took place and libwpg-0.1.0 official release came to be.

Thank you very much for the release! This is also just about the right
time before OOoCon 2007.

Now, where's the party? :-)

Regards,

Ariya

[Libwpg-devel] ATTN: libwpg-0.1.0 is out of the door

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people.

Not without a lot of joy, I come to you announcing that early this week
a happy event took place and libwpg-0.1.0 official release came to be.

As every initial release, even this baby might have some rough edges.
Nevertheless, we are confident that it will bring joy to its parents and
to those who will have any use of it.

The thanks for this release go to many people. First of all to Mark
"uwog" Maurer and Will Lachance of multiple fames for instigating this
project. To Mark Oude Kotte (aka Foddex) for starting it, to Ariya
Hidayat for doing almost all the work, and last and least to me who will
take all the glory and to whom you can send your donations and thank-you
money :-)

I would almost forget Uncle Google who put some $$$ into this in the
frame of Google Summer of Code in 2006.

Enjoy and send your bug reports to lib...@li...
(you'll have to register to do that though)

Prosperity and success to you all as well as to myself

Fridrich Strba
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD4DBQFGuejCu9a1imXPdA8RAs4zAJYiOdKcUBcfPVX0AUKutfRn+TvaAJwMqNHL
06XRer046k0KIpxeIxBLWQ==
=efTW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg 0.1.0 release ???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> However, if you wouldn't mind, how about giving me another two weeks
> to have some last looks? Thus, a release on the first week of August
> looks great to me.

So, how do we stand here?

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGsazTu9a1imXPdA8RAr8nAJ4pNlAwiXisiiIjozQ9lf7fkRlHWgCfVIO9
3q57Q2P+d76POfjMMCmiqxk=
=mG+M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg 0.1.0 release ???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, Robert,

Robert Steinmetz AIA wrote:
> Does this release support embedded WPG graphics in WPD files?

No, support for embedded wpg graphics in wpd files will not be there
before the libwpd 0.9.0 release (whenever it will come). This is
concerning only converting and loading standalone WPG files.

> If so when do you think it will it appear in OpenOffice.org.

I don't know really because it is not for me to decide, nevertheless, a
WPG importer based on a pretty recent CVS snapshot of libwpg will be
available in the Novell/Debian/Ubuntu/Whatever version of OpenOffice.org
2.3, since it is integrated into ooo-build system.

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGn45qu9a1imXPdA8RAkd9AJ9zidzXPtWcibGAXPz6vJEnXYtNNQCeIho3
aB3gcOTFM6k2GerGQknko8k=
=tv3H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg 0.1.0 release ???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> Fridrich, I'll be grateful if you can manage the release, as I have
> lack of knowledge about the release process as well as being dragged
> with The Real Life (tm) at the moment.

No problem, whenever we decide, I will do the legwork.

> However, if you wouldn't mind, how about giving me another two weeks
> to have some last looks? Thus, a release on the first week of August
> looks great to me.

Whenever you want. I just wanted to announce by this that I feel like we
fixed the most of bugs and that from my side it is ready. But there is
no hurry anyway. Better a good library then a library that breaks
everything.

> In addition, let's just make a timely release, say every 6 months. We
> can sync it with SUSE or (K)ubuntu time plan.

I generally don't so much support timely releases of spare-time
projects. Because if life happens, people's expectations are not met and
one is treated bad on /. :-) But, we can say that if there are
bug-fixes, we release every N months some a bugfix. I had some time ago
an idea of every 2 months a new libwpd, but as the life was going on, I
was not really able to keep it always :-) Especially because iDefense
came into it :-)

Cheers

F.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGn3/vu9a1imXPdA8RAhFqAJ4ke7bbXmVh4WW3GJhNIdoYMzcmggCfVAgh
HD0Lpgc2FGRVziKR213m218=
=B86A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] libwpg 0.1.0 release ???

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> The libwpg underwent quite a thorough testing as a part of the new
> wpd2odt. Many documents with embedded WPGs are in sum1's 46k files that
> he uses to test libwpd. This helped to fix quite a load of bugs and we
> can responsibly say that stability-wise, it is ripe for 0.1.0 release.
>
> I was just wanting to ask what do you, people, think about this. It
> might be possible to add maybe an API for embedded text without
> implementing it though. But I would not mind to go public even with the
> library as it is.

Fridrich, I'll be grateful if you can manage the release, as I have
lack of knowledge about the release process as well as being dragged
with The Real Life (tm) at the moment.

However, if you wouldn't mind, how about giving me another two weeks
to have some last looks? Thus, a release on the first week of August
looks great to me.

In addition, let's just make a timely release, say every 6 months. We
can sync it with SUSE or (K)ubuntu time plan.


Regards,

Ariya

[Libwpg-devel] libwpg 0.1.0 release ???

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people.

The libwpg underwent quite a thorough testing as a part of the new
wpd2odt. Many documents with embedded WPGs are in sum1's 46k files that
he uses to test libwpd. This helped to fix quite a load of bugs and we
can responsibly say that stability-wise, it is ripe for 0.1.0 release.

I was just wanting to ask what do you, people, think about this. It
might be possible to add maybe an API for embedded text without
implementing it though. But I would not mind to go public even with the
library as it is.

Advise

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGnh8Cu9a1imXPdA8RAvFNAJ4u+Pv3af3SjcTIJq4F5uoC299joACdFeXb
5TFSITWgn+OZxyWKMF6+NiM=
=f2Qx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] some problems with bitmaps

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> OK, I had a look today, and the problem was twofold:
>
> 1) raster length for color_depth < 4 is the width of the image in pixels
> divided by the number of pixels per byte. The last incomplete byte is
> padded by 0 bits.
>
> 2) depending on this, when filling the WPGBitmap class with points, we
> have to keep in mind that a new scanline will start with a new byte, so
> skipping anything in the previous unfinished byte is a must before we
> start a new line.
>
> In the same run, there was a problem with some of these images where we
> were trying to read more bytes than the file contained because of the
> fact that we were trying to read the same number of bytes as pixels in
> the image, even though, several pixels do share the same byte.
>
> This things look solved now.

Great news! I'm sorry that I didn't have time at all to look into this.

> Also, just for your information, a fabulous QA guy, our own AbiWord's
> sum1 took hold of the new wpd2odt tool that is also calling libwpg for
> the embedded graphics. This is a good news, since it can help us to have
> a great quality of the library, but also a bad news, since he is able to
> find a bug if it exists, so a load of work might wait for us.

Well, that's hardly a bad news. Fixing bugs during development is
still many times better than after it is made public.


Regards,

Ariya



>
> Cheers
>
> Fridrich
>
> Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> >> I was trying to handle the color_formats 1, 2 and 3 in WPG2. Although, I
> >> managed to get something, I am asking whether the run length encoding
> >> does not assume something that is true only for color format 4. Do you
> >> think you will have some little time to look towards these two
> >> documents? I tried, but since you coded it, you might see the solution
> >> faster then me. Maybe the size of the white and the black runs???
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD4DBQFGkjgEu9a1imXPdA8RAijxAJiZyLZSRnuvoA0/ZZu5TheJX62jAJ9EinMW
> I5HYQfXTX6BtUsjHKbh5RQ==
> =8BU7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>


-- 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ariyahidayat
http://www.google.com/search?q=ariya+hidayat&btnI

Re: [Libwpg-devel] some problems with bitmaps

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

OK, I had a look today, and the problem was twofold:

1) raster length for color_depth < 4 is the width of the image in pixels
divided by the number of pixels per byte. The last incomplete byte is
padded by 0 bits.

2) depending on this, when filling the WPGBitmap class with points, we
have to keep in mind that a new scanline will start with a new byte, so
skipping anything in the previous unfinished byte is a must before we
start a new line.

In the same run, there was a problem with some of these images where we
were trying to read more bytes than the file contained because of the
fact that we were trying to read the same number of bytes as pixels in
the image, even though, several pixels do share the same byte.

This things look solved now.

Also, just for your information, a fabulous QA guy, our own AbiWord's
sum1 took hold of the new wpd2odt tool that is also calling libwpg for
the embedded graphics. This is a good news, since it can help us to have
a great quality of the library, but also a bad news, since he is able to
find a bug if it exists, so a load of work might wait for us.

Cheers

Fridrich

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
>> I was trying to handle the color_formats 1, 2 and 3 in WPG2. Although, I
>> managed to get something, I am asking whether the run length encoding
>> does not assume something that is true only for color format 4. Do you
>> think you will have some little time to look towards these two
>> documents? I tried, but since you coded it, you might see the solution
>> faster then me. Maybe the size of the white and the black runs???
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD4DBQFGkjgEu9a1imXPdA8RAijxAJiZyLZSRnuvoA0/ZZu5TheJX62jAJ9EinMW
I5HYQfXTX6BtUsjHKbh5RQ==
=8BU7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] some problems with bitmaps

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi, Ariya,

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> OK. I'll have  a look, although likely I'm going to do something
> useful only on the weekend. Also, if you have more variants of the
> bitmaps, just send them to me. I found out with X3, it's almost
> possible (or I simply miss it) to create less-than-8-bit bitmaps.

Yeah, these pictures are extracted from documents that we have in our
libwpd regression suite using an if zero-ed debug code. Now, there is
something with the line length or so in the RLE. I was just thinking
whether one could not be safer to use internally a std::vector <
std::vector < char > > to do the RLE decoding instead of having a flat
array of the size of data_size*width*height. Like this, we would even
avoid a possibility of the kind of security problems we had some times
ago in libwpd. And for std::vector < T > t, it is mandated by the
standard that if it is not empty, &t[0] points to the beginning of the
wrapped array and that this one is stored in contiguous memory space.

I would try to do something, but I guess that it would take me much more
time to go through the RLE decoding logic then it would take you :-)

Take your time, I am not rushing anything, although the Debian OOo
maintainer is breathing fire on my neck for a release of libwpg, but who
cares pushy Debian maintainers :-P

Cheers

F.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGi2M8u9a1imXPdA8RAhKvAJ4oYtyyM/pTgMoRq2gYOCOdyKzRxACfW/hY
lMdqVBysahLlJizgCdW65AI=
=RROi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] some problems with bitmaps

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> I was trying to handle the color_formats 1, 2 and 3 in WPG2. Although, I
> managed to get something, I am asking whether the run length encoding
> does not assume something that is true only for color format 4. Do you
> think you will have some little time to look towards these two
> documents? I tried, but since you coded it, you might see the solution
> faster then me. Maybe the size of the white and the black runs???

OK. I'll have  a look, although likely I'm going to do something
useful only on the weekend. Also, if you have more variants of the
bitmaps, just send them to me. I found out with X3, it's almost
possible (or I simply miss it) to create less-than-8-bit bitmaps.

And thanks for integrating libwpd2+libwpg, that's simply awesome !


Regards,

Ariya

[Libwpg-devel] some problems with bitmaps

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, Ariya,

I was trying to handle the color_formats 1, 2 and 3 in WPG2. Although, I
managed to get something, I am asking whether the run length encoding
does not assume something that is true only for color format 4. Do you
think you will have some little time to look towards these two
documents? I tried, but since you coded it, you might see the solution
faster then me. Maybe the size of the white and the black runs???

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGiZRxu9a1imXPdA8RAl96AJ9RSFpTrvMMAre8ZsPGs3ReNluVIQCcCIdL
m+Sz+JFSogKMEqM6omF3jZw=
=NO7u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Libwpg-devel] First images in WPD files are converted :-)

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people

Just to attract your attention to this one
http://www.go-oo.org/~fridrich/first_pictures.png

For the while just the image stream without information about its frame
like anchoring and scaling. Struggled to create and ODT that OOo would
accept and render correctly. The documents I was generating were valid
according to the strict schema, but OOo would ignore images inside of
them. If I manage to get tomorrow "od" who should be the guru of shapes
embedded into Writer, I might have solution. I don't want to start to
parse all the data WP is giving us, because it looks like ~500LOC to get
all permutations right. Want to see what information I will need to
import the shapes into OOo and will parse that one only for the while.

This result was obtained by a mixture of libwpd2 and writerperfect HEAD
and libwpg in fs_experimental branch. The build sequence is (1) libwpd2,
(2) libwpg and (3) writerperfect, if you want to check and code on it
too. A lot of cheesy hacks for the while, so a lot of space for improvement.

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGgp7gu9a1imXPdA8RAhGOAJ42dfnxyI7sX2kqq4xNho4E4zFccQCfYc7s
OG2Ypk30IPJkBwk1FWy41+U=
=OqFl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Libwpg-devel] Branch fs_experimental

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, I just created fs_experimental branch that I will use for
incompatible changes. It is currently producing libwpg-0.2.0 and will be
parallel installable (including headers) with libwpg-0.1.x

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGgMjXu9a1imXPdA8RAv2jAJwIhlRNxlm4bCSfy0Fu1Qjo4/MM2gCfYdXN
h2BYuZJPUl0RKEvDInJv2XI=
=ocJp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] [Libwpd-devel] My intentions next week

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

BTW, I have a problem with validation, sometimes xmllint simply crashes
without giving any useful information. I tried several free and open
source tools, and the best among them, jing, does not like the regex a
the line 3838 of the 1.0 schema :-( So, any ideas, so that I can be 100%
sure we are producing a compliant odt?

Cheers

Fridrich

Fridrich Strba wrote:
> Today, I branched the writerperfect module and in the fs_odf_porting, I
> am trying to create a wpd2odt tool that will create an opendocument
> instead of sxw. The goal is that the resulting xml validates against the
> strict schema.

- --
Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGfoMiu9a1imXPdA8RArbwAJoCu+QvWLivnDwi/RUdbsOJMrRmzgCfZ19Y
MHAngyzEhE9yveyWRSLWmgs=
=Z0di
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Libwpg-devel] My intentions next week

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, good people.

Today, I branched the writerperfect module and in the fs_odf_porting, I
am trying to create a wpd2odt tool that will create an opendocument
instead of sxw. The goal is that the resulting xml validates against the
strict schema.

Next week, we have a free-hacking week at Novell and we are working on
any projects that we would like. I chose libwpd and libwpg. My goal
would be to start implementing in a branch ABI incompatible changes.
Those changes would be a support for text box and inside it for a
possibility to have a WPG picture parsed and put out as a
WPXInputStream* that libwpg could take and we could then grab its output
and try to insert it in our ODTs. I have already a little idea how to do
it, since one can add a picture as a <draw:g> context into an ODF file.
Since we already have an OdfExporter that converts libwpg's output into
a ODG stream, that should be possible within the week, I hope.

Just to tell you that I will branch also libwpd these days and if you
feel like doing some ABI incompatible changes, feel free to commit to
the branch once it is created.

Any suggestions/patches/... welcome

Cheers

Fridrich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGfEZju9a1imXPdA8RAmLcAJ9CJvxGLguVL4e91+vjDpwm2btMeACfaKk8
m6X4oA+qdcNkoJG0HebWFWA=
=u6lQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [Libwpg-devel] Proposal: input stream simplification

[Ariya H. <ari...@gm...>]

> Honestly, when I am turning this in my head, let us start with the input
> stream class and not to focus on big constructions. An approach of 1
> interface class + 1 sample fully functional implementation (with as
> little dependencies as possible) would be a good start. I do not think
> that I will have enough free time (and surely not the official blessing
> of my employer to do it in company time) to replace libgsf :-(

I guess as a start that's already good.
Feel free to create a project for that (preferably in Google Code),
then I'll see what I can help to populate the implementation.

> I would really really like to keep it there for 0.1.x and drop it for
> 0.2.x. Can you live with my stubborneness?

Yes, I believe it's fair enough.


Best regards,

Ariya

Re: [Libwpg-devel] Proposal: input stream simplification

[Fridrich S. <fri...@bl...>]

Ariya,

Ariya Hidayat wrote:
> Because one good reason (IMHO): this libwpg-stream will soon disappear
> tentatively for libwpg 0.2 (because by then we need your stream
> library). There is no point offering some code which won't be
> supported at all in the next version, nevermind that the stuff in
> libwpg-stream has no direct relation to WPG format.

I am turning this since two weeks in my head, and really understand your 
concerns. On my side, I would like to have the wpg2foo tools support 
also the OLE2 embedded documents. Believe me, the wpg importer 
integrated into stock OOo is not for tomorrow because there is a lot of 
bureaucracy about including new libraries (libwps approval by Sun legal 
took 6 months and I was bugging the people litterally every day) and new 
features. And the add-on converter built against the SDK is using those 
stream classes. And I cannot change it, because all the resources that I 
use for the integrated filter stream class are not exported in the 
public API :-(

There would be possibility to remove the stream abstraction in libwpg 
and keep the OLE2 stuff in wpg2foo tools: make them depend on 
libwpd-stream-0.8 and make them use the GSFStream class. That is the 
stream class that is there for whole 0.8.x release series, but this 
would mean a gsf dependency and I really feel uneasy about it.

So, if you could make me a favour and live with this situation, I would 
really prefer to have in the libwpg sources a WPXInputStream 
implementation that supports OLE2 embedded WPG files. It is really dead 
easy to build and link with. The statical perfectspot.exe is the witness.

> For output, perhaps:
> - stream to file
> - temporary file ("scratch")
> - zip container 
> Would be fantastic if we can create ODF container using this library
> (useful for stand-alone command-line tools, not for e.g.
> OpenOffice.org filter)
> As I wrote earlier, seems we're going to create the more-portable, C++
> version of libgsf.

Honestly, when I am turning this in my head, let us start with the input 
stream class and not to focus on big constructions. An approach of 1 
interface class + 1 sample fully functional implementation (with as 
little dependencies as possible) would be a good start. I do not think 
that I will have enough free time (and surely not the official blessing 
of my employer to do it in company time) to replace libgsf :-(

> Note 1: do we still need libwpd_types.h?

Kind of. it is because of the uint8_t * output of the read function. 
Since the return values are not part of a function signature, an 
unsigned char * could work as well. But again, this would mean to 
require a very recent version of libwpd for the WPXStream.h header 
without libwpd_types.h (which is really little). I am also thinking 
about removing the use of uintXY_t and intXY_t from libwpd for next 
release cycle (as we do not use it in libwpg), nevertheless, given that 
I spent >a month auditing libwpd code for different potential integer 
issues, I really don't want to do this very quickly, because having an 
advisory agains your library is quite tiring stuff, especially if many 
many many people use it.

> Note 2: how about building on Mac OS X? any attempt yet?

Not yet, sorry

> PS: I'm not adamant to get rid of libwpg-stream. I know you must have
> a very good reason to do this separation. Just please consider my
> rationale above. I have no problem if we decide not to drop it, I just
> want to make sure we all know the consequences.

I would really really like to keep it there for 0.1.x and drop it for 
0.2.x. Can you live with my stubborneness?

Cheers

Fridrich