[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: > I took binding-jms-cd01-rev4, opened it in OpenOffice, fixed the line > numbering, and exported the PDF. > > Attached is the result. It is more than three times larger - I wonder > what the difference is? > The formatting in the Word+Acrobat version looks a bit nicer to me. For example, section 1.2 has the indentation badly mangled in the OO3-produced version. I also prefer the way the Word+Acrobat version puts a gap between line numbers and text. I found the button to get the left sidebar TOC to appear in the Word+Acrobat version. This is great! We should ask the editors to use this form in future when producing PDFs. Simon > -Eric. > > Simon Nash wrote: >> 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 >>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]