Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
On 27 April 2011 21:42, Mark Preston wrote: > Dear good gods alive no! :eave the HTML to proper HTML IDE tools like > Eclipse and don't try to be everything in one package. > Hm, you mean like don't bother with OOo/LO because there are plenty of text editors, separate graphics editors and spreadsheets around. (Certainly Inkscape makes Draw largely unnecessary) Don't bother with TinyMCE/CKEditor because there is Dreamweaver and FrontPage (or vice versa). I wasn't actually suggesting any specific action so no need to jump to conclusions. All I'm saying is that looking at the way things are going, LO will either change or become irrelevant. How it would change is something that needs wider strategic thought but I don't see much evidence of this. OTOH it could all be happening behind the scenes. As I said, I'm sure Bill Gates said leave those toy phones to Nokia, RIM and Apple. Google seem to have been smarter. As mobile and web technologies take over I can see much harder times ahead for anyone dependent on local dependencies. On 26/04/2011 22:48, e-letter wrote: >> I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant >> technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant >> need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital >> readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document >> formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does >> not adapt it will become obsolete. >> > > Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other > electronic format) editor? > >> I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when >> all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download > > May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on > the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url > when activated via the command terminal > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
Dear good gods alive no! :eave the HTML to proper HTML IDE tools like Eclipse and don't try to be everything in one package. On 26/04/2011 22:48, e-letter wrote: >> I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant >> technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant >> need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital >> readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document >> formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does >> not adapt it will become obsolete. >> > > Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other > electronic format) editor? > >> I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when >> all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download > > May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on > the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url > when activated via the command terminal > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
> My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well. Production > of epub documents is a marginal requirement I'm sure that is what MSFT thought about Windows in relation to cell phones and tablets ;-) , which does not need to be addressed with a built-in function. > Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals are adequately served by > the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now several btw. > So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into LibO Writer.Just my 2c I don't think that was a specific proposal at this point, just that the entire LO proposition could become marginalised by mobile technologies and e-publishing in a relatively short space of time. > //James > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > > -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
I use LibO for writing, and produce ebooks from the output. There are many ebook formats, as has already been pointed out by others, the main two being mobi (Kindle) and epub (almost every other e-reader). I am active in a forum on ebooks, called mobileread.com. I think I can say that the majority of writers there use one of two methods for creating ebooks. Either they use a service called Smashwords, which takes MS Word documents and produces about six different kinds of ebooks, including pdf, txt, rtf, which most people don't count as ebook formats. Or they use a program called Calibre, which has its support forum on mobileread.com, and which takes odt files as its preferred input. These two methods I would call the professional approach. On the other hand, someone interested in converting some of their documents to ebook (read epub) format for storage and use on their e-reader can make use of an extension which has been available for some time for OOo. I can't remember how good this is, since it's a long time since I used it, but I think it produces acceptable quality for what we can call the non-professional approach. My take on this suggestion is that LibO does what it does well. Production of epub documents is a marginal requirement, which does not need to be addressed with a built-in function. Professionals won't use it, and non-professionals are adequately served by the extension I mentioned - I believe there are now several btw. So the bottom line is that I vote against incorporating epub production into LibO Writer. Just my 2c //James -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
On 26 April 2011 22:48, e-letter wrote: > >I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant > >technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the > dominant > >need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital > >readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has > document > >formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf > does > >not adapt it will become obsolete. > > > > Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other > electronic format) editor? > Its already a sort of XML editor :-) >I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when >all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on > the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url > when activated via the command terminal > There are a number of reasons why this is clumsy. Ok, its a work around but its not an elegant solution. Most people produce most of these documents simply because they are locked into a desktop applications mentality and don't think about what the purpose of the document really is. This isn't going to change over night but we are clearly in a transition from desktop being king to at least desktop a lot less important. IMHO, LO needs to be looking several years ahead because we know how long development can take. . > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: Question about proposing the creation of a new format
>I think this is a very interesting issue. We are moving from the dominant >technologies that were designed to put information on paper to the dominant >need of presenting information on screens. With the revolution in digital >readers this is only going to increase and then what relevance has document >formats that are primarily designed to target hard copy output? If odf does >not adapt it will become obsolete. > Seems to suggest that LO should become some sort of html (or any other electronic format) editor? >I am constantly irritated by having to download pdfs, .docs and so on when >all I want to do is view the information without cluttering up my download May I suggest to use the 'load url' bar to read documents directly on the web? As for pdf documents, evince can open directly from the url when activated via the command terminal -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
