On Sun, 2002-10-20 at 15:17, Martin Sevior wrote: > > HI David, > I think you have a pretty reasonable set of requirements for a > professional writer. I think/hope that the feature set we'll provide for > abiword 2.0 will get us a foot in the door for users in your catagory. >
I think so too. 1.0.x is already good enough for people writing for me. Specifics: > > There you go, easily quotable praise. Feel free to do so, as well. I'm > > actually using CVS HEAD, and keeping all my files in a local CVS > > repository just in case, and the automatic assert on opening a document > > is irritating. I thought Martin was going to remove that? > > Sorry. Will do. Thanks. > > > 3) Handling of RTF from non-standard applications is still a bit > > intolerant. I'm sure the RTF produced by Quark XPress is utterly > > horrible, but Abi refuses to open it. Since I get sent RTF from lots of > > different apps, I need something that will open everything. > > > > Could you please open bugs in bugzilla and attach offending documents? > I've found that we can get most docs to import reasonablally well with a > only a few minor tweaks. > Sorry, the documents are too confidential to post to bugzilla. I could send a zipped set to individual developers who want to work on it, though. (I'm the person who gets to decide who sees the documents.) > > 3.5) Tables aren't quite good enough, but they're really close, so I'm > > sure this will be fixed very soon. (Thanks Martin!) > > > > Can you be a bit more specfic on what you need or is the current state of > bugs in tables (which I'm working through) just too bad to make them worth > while? > Just the bugs. As far as I can see, all the features are there. Actually, I have a document that doesn't import properly which I could post to bugzilla, so I'll do that now. Thanks for the response. David -- David Chart http://www.dchart.demon.co.uk/
