I'm sure lot of people use it. In my previous job, we made every online
documentation like this (with WORD), I didn't achieve to made them
understand a wiki would be better, for design, usability,
maintainability... This function is far from perfect but I'm sure it's used
a lot. Then the choice between writer.IE.Netscape isn't useful at all for
me...

Kévin

2012/11/5 Jay Lozier <[email protected]>

>  On 11/05/2012 08:18 AM, Kévin PEIGNOT wrote:
>
> Hi Rob, Jay
>
> That's right, HTML export produce very, very bad HTML product (just try to
> export a white page...) and that exporting styles to a separated CSS file
> (or at list a separated section) would be better. Then according this
> option, I added this one in the whiteboard
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Analyses/Global_Options#Load.2FSave
>
> Kévin
>
> I agree that exporting to html is not a very useful option partly because
> it does not (can not?) produce easily maintainable html code. The fact the
> code probably works is less important than that maintaining/editing the
> code is very difficult.
>
> Should we ask on the users list if anyone uses export to html and if so
> what is their opinion?
>
> Jay
>
>
> 2012/11/5 Jay Lozier <[email protected]>
>
>> On 11/04/2012 04:14 PM, Rob Snelders wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The export-option in the options-dialog -> Load/Save ->
>>> HTML-compatibility states that you can save for LibreOffice Writer,
>>> Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator. Looking at the code that states
>>> Netscape 4-compatibility.
>>> But has this still any value? As the browsers are for basic HTML
>>> compatible for some years. I think that the Netscape output also works in
>>> Internet Explorer.
>>> If it still has value then the name netscape navigator should change as
>>> less and less people know what Netscape is.
>>>
>>> This bug triggerd the question:
>>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56726
>>>
>>> --
>>> Greetings,
>>> Rob Snelders
>>>
>>>  Rob,
>>
>> >From the few times I exported as html, I noticed the html produced
>> appeared to be fairly standard html 4.01. The main problem I noticed is
>> that all the styles are embedded in the html. Note, I believe this is legal
>> html, if now considered bad practice The export modules do not produce a
>> CSS page. This makes the resulting html, IMHO, very difficult to maintain.
>>
>> You can check your html at http://validator.w3.org/
>>
>> I find I prefer to save the text as txt file then cut and then directly
>> create the html page(s) and CSS pages I need.
>>
>> --
>> Jay Lozier
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
>> Problems?
>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
>> deleted
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jay [email protected]
>
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Reply via email to