From: tim h. <te...@gl...> - 2004-08-06 04:05:08
|
Last Thursday 05 August 2004 19:13, Silvan was like: > > Seriously, it's not totally illegible, but the text gets mangled. May I > > ask how you are creating the html pages? Would it work to simply _not_ > > stipulate height (& width) attributes? - assuming the images are the > > right size to start with. Actually, I'm sure it would. > > I'm using Open Office. It generates crappy HTML, yes it really does, and > no, I don't want to use $ALTERNATIVE. I'm getting along so far with > scripts to repair the damage. Fixing the broken relative links, for > example. I'm comfortable with this system, and so am free to concentrate > on the real business at hand, which is plenty demanding in of itself. OK, I understand. Incidentally, you won't want to know that the one thing kword is good for is producing nice, clean html. (useful for converting M$.docs). You clearly have your work cut out. > OO seems to generate HEIGHT and WIDTH even when using the original size, > but in fact I seldom use the original size anyway. The majority of the > images are resized smaller on purpose, so that they look better after > assembling all of this into a PDF. Original-size images come out grossly > oversized in the PDF, but PDF-sized images come out grossly undersized and > mangled in the web version. Yes, all images should have height & width specified, but will usually display without, the pages just won't validate, that's all ;-] > So the best alternative seems to me to continue resizing them in the > masters (with HTML), then script out the size and whatever other extra > attributes when processing the masters into the published web version. > (All of the processing is done with HTMLDOC.) I'm not familiar with HTMLDOC, perhaps I should become so. I use a text editor for html, never found a wysiwyg editor that I liked. Just looked at bluefish today, looks interesting. Anyhow, I digress. The best approach is that you keep doing what you're doing, absolutely. > I suck at regexes and at HTML for that matter. I would be DELIGHTED to > have a script that could weed out all the crap. I could then build the PDF > from the undoctored masters, script out all the cruft into intermediate web > masters, and then process those intermediate masters into the finished web > version. That would be totally copacetic. I will endeavour to win your approbation then ;) > Since you're probably not tracking the CVS version, and probably don't have > the masters, I've attached one of the masters that I won't be editing > anytime in the next few days. A script that could fix this should fix > everything. Thanks. I may be some time. > Nothing is ever static enough. I need to come up with a dynamic solution. > > > It's probably scriptable, I could probably do it in Python, but as I'm > > very much a learner when it comes to coding it'll take me a while, but if > > it interests you & you don't have the inclination to do it yourself, I'd > > be happy to give it a go. > > I definitely don't have the inclination, and I'd much rather use my time > for some other purpose. If you could do something like this for me, I > would be in your debt. OK, I'll have a look and see what I can come up with. No promises as I'm on a learning curve with scripting, but now I have a clear idea of what we're aiming at I'll give it me best shot :-) cheers tim hall |