[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] ODF or Word format for the OASIS Specs??
Eric Johnson wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Simon Nash wrote: >> Eric Johnson wrote: >>> I've run into at least one problem where round-trips between ODF and DOC >>> don't quite work with our documents. (Line numbers are just one >>> example.) I'd want to test more before assuming that we can use >>> both. If you don't update the table of contents properly before >>> converting to >>> ODF, OpenOffice might mangle the links. >>> >>> Tests I've been doing just now show that once saved as an ODT file, >>> OpenOffice doesn't show line numbers automatically upon reopening, even >>> though the option is turned on. Could be that this is a bug in OO 3.0.0 >>> which is fixed in 3.0.1 - I'd need to test. >>> >> We had an example of this kind of problem on today's Bindings call >> where section numbers were different in OO and Word. >> >> I suspect that having some people view a document in OO with others >> viewing it in Word is going to cause some problems. So I was >> suggesting that people could use whichever format they prefer for >> authoring, but people viewing it would use the same software as >> the author used. > Keeping in mind that I'm the die-hard Linux user in the bunch, and I'm > recommending some caution in switching, just based on little items here > and there. >>> Even though I'd be happier if we switched, I do recommend some >>> caution here. >>> >>> OO does a *much* better job of generating PDFs. >>> >> I'm intrigued by this. I never had any problems doing this with >> Word+Acrobat. > It could be this is just the default configuration. Whatever the > editors for the SCA specifications are doing, I'm not too enthused. > > By *default* OpenOffice is generating a PDF table of contents (shows up > on the left as clickable links), and all intra-document references are > actually clickable. All the external references end up clickable too. > If I take the .DOC file that gets published, open in in OpenOffice, and > export as PDF, I get a much easier-to-use PDF document than what I'm > seeing now. Unfortunately, it doesn't end up being quite the same PDF > when I do it, as say, when Anish or Simon does it. > > I'd be satisfied if Word+Acrobat could mimic this, and the editors were > doing what it takes to get the slightly nicer output. > There are two ways to create a PDF from Word+Acrobat: print to PDF, and save as PDF. The former produces exactly the same as would have been printed to physical paper - no clickable links, etc. The latter produces something a good deal more interesting, with clickable TOC links, though I can't figure out how to get the TOC to show up in a left sidebar. In a past life I worked on documents that did this, so I know what you mean. I am attaching the results of a "save as PDF" on the JMS binding spec CD01 rev4. I would be interested in how this compares with the PDFs that OO3 produces. Simon >> Is this the solution to the problem... everybody posts PDFs? > We need an editable format posted, though. > > We did discuss this early on, and at least informally agreed that we'd > stick to Word. As the one who suffers most from that decision, I'm > still OK with it. I think the only reason it came up again was that the > compare functionality in MS Word turns out to be awful - based on what > Anish reports - and it worked in OpenOffice. Those comparison PDFs are a > one-way problem - we don't need an editable form, so why not continue > doing what we're doing? > > -Eric. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > > >
sca-binding-jms-1.1-spec-cd01-rev4.pdf
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]