Re: [tdf-discuss] Standalone PDF
Hi, On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:57:22 +, Sveinn í Felli wrote: Þann fös 2.des 2011 08:40, skrifaði Uwe Altmann: Hi Am 02.12.11 05:12, schrieb Paul: Does Libre office have a stand alone PDF application? ie - does Libre provide the PDF editor by itself without all the other features in the 200 MB download - is it possible to install only the PDF tool without all the other features ? All responses appreciated. Thanks, Paula No. But then, Draw can open (most) PDFs. Maybe not ideal for what PDFs are intended for, but works. It depends on what you want to achieve when editing PDF. In the accessibility community, PDFs often cause headaches because most people don't know how to produce accessible documents. If your ODF source file is not accessible and if you forget to check the Tagged PDF and Export bookmarks options when exporting, you end up with a file where fixing the accessibility issues costs a lot of money (= price of Adobe Acrobat + time investment). I don't know if importing PDF into Draw and editing it would be the solution for accessibility. For example, I don't know if you can check the reading order of text in Draw. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ 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] user forums ?
Hi, At 05:52 10-11-2011, Augustine Souza wrote: For the new forum ... My request is that background images for functional content be kept to a minimum for reasons of accessibility. Some people may want to have a different color for the page background because they find white painful. (There are such people.) I would like to add a few more accessibility considerations: * If phpBB is chosen for the forum, please take a look at http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=17254: An accessible style for PhpBB. (You can also get in touch with the owners of AccessifyForum, which is based on phpBB.) * Another forum solution with good accessibility out of the box is PunBB http://punbb.informer.com/. Best regards, Christophe If the person uses css to change the background color, many background images are no longer visible. This is quite common with phpBB. Buttons such as new post or quote or reply disappear when the background color is changed using css. There maybe workarounds such as the alt tag but that's no longer pretty. If anyone is interested I can give a couple of examples. -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ 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] IAccessible2, IBM, Oracle (was: (...) Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)
Hi Christian, All, This is my fifth attempt to send a response to the list (after previous attempts on 5, 8, 15 and 26 July). I hope it gets through this time. At 18:21 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi Christophe, *, On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be wrote: At 16:14 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be wrote: At 23:16 4-6-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: [...] Well, as seen on this list (by Malte's post), apparently there has been work on a *private* cws that nobody in the community (and yes, people who are working on private cws are not part of the community in this regard - they are of course for that part of their work that happens in public) All promises IBM is making/has made so far is only lip service for me. I only believe it after I see the actual contributions from them. (And as written I don't consider code dumps that need a man-year of work to get integrated as contribution) If Oracle asks IBM to implement IAccessible2 on version 3.1 and releases OpenOffice.org 3.2 before IBM has submitted the IAccessible2 implementation, how is IBM to blame? Reality check please. 1st of all: What is stuff you know, and what is stuff you guess? Do you know that the 3.1 based ia2 dump/work is because Oracle asked for it? If Oracle asked for it, do you know when Oracle asked for it? Do you think Oracle really is so stupid to explicitly ask for code based on an old branch? If Oracle did ask for it, and IBM did contribute - why wasn't the cws integrated? CS: What reality check? I talked to and exchanged mails with people in Oracle and IBM. Since September 2008 I have been involved in a European RD project on accessibility where Oracle (previously Sun) is one of the biggest partners. So I talked to accessibility folks at Oracle. That is reality. Yes, IBM donated an IAccessible2 implementation to Oracle. Malte Timmermann talked about this at FOSDEM 2011: http://www.fosdem.org/2011/schedule/event/ooo_accessibility. Just like you I don't like secret deals about open source projects. I agree it is better if code contributions should happen on public repositories. But that does not mean these things don't happen. At 18:21 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: 2nd) Obviously you cannot integrate something that is not ready. Why was it not ready? Because nobody worked on it. CS: I throw your own question back to you: What is stuff you know, and what is stuff you guess? ;-) At 18:21 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Who could do the work on it? Of course best the developers who know the code, i.e IBM developers. And you cannot delay a release for years. (the cws Caolan mentioned in the blog-comment was created in 2010-05 - while the branch-off for 3.2 already happened 2009-09 more than half a year earlier) Between 3.1 and 3.2 the code had changed and had been moved to another type of repository. Again reality check. Oracle surely did ask for the code to be contributed against the current, actively being-worked-on codeline. CS: Again: What is stuff you know, and what is stuff you guess? Oracle had released a newer version by the time IBM submitted their code. Fact: this was stated in public at FOSDEM 2011. At 18:21 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: A codeline that is not in feature-freeze. What IBM then delivers is a completely different question. Also whether Oracle/Sun asks for it in 2008, but IBM delivers in 2010, it's obvious that code makes progress. CS: Obviously. Nobody is debating that code makes progress. I don't know when Oracle asked for it. IBM promised to add IAccessible2 in 2007 IBM joins OpenOffice.org community - will contribute IAccessible2 support: http://blogs.oracle.com/korn/entry/ibm_joins_openoffice_org_community (10 September 2007). A few weeks later IBM wrote they were adding it: IAccessible2 is in or being implemented in these products today: (...) * Open Office (IBM is just beginning the contribution effort): https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/schwer/tags/windows?lang=en (27 September 2007). In July 2008, people said it that it shouldn't be expected before the end of 2008 (OpenOffice.org 3.x but not 3.0): http://www.freelists.org/post/nvda/nvda-and-openoffice,13. The contribution was mentioned again at teh OpenOffice.org conference in November 2008 (in a talk by Michael Karasick, Director of Lotus Development IBM China): http://blogs.oracle.com/malte/entry/iaccessible2_or_ibm_to_contribute. At 18:21 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: That is the reason for the complex and time-consuming integration work that Oracle needed to do for IAccessible2. NO! Why does it have to be Oracle to do the integration work. Again one of the points about collaboration. Just uploading a million-line-codepatch somewhere is not contributing. It is complying with whatever deals that were signed
Re: [tdf-discuss] A template for the LibreOffice Conference
Hi, At 11:49 25-7-2011, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hello everyone, On this page: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ConferenceTemplates You will be able to upload your Impress template for the LibreOffice conference in Paris. Each speaker shall use that template (it's useful and avoid technical issues, among other things). I hope you aren't serious about enforcing that. I would refuse to use a template that I consider insufficiently accessible (or that uses Arial). Every year, we will run a template contest and the winner will have his/her template used for the conference. I strongly suggest that template designers take accessibility guidelines into account. See OpenOffice Impress (v3.2) under the Presentations section at http://adod.idrc.ocad.ca/. Best regards, Christophe Feel free to come up with your own proposal; the Design team will then vote on each of the proposals. Deadline for the template submission is the 12th of August. One word of advice: - do use the existing conference logo and the full logo of LibreOffice - follow our colours :-) Good luck! Charles-H. Schulz. -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ 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] ignore m$ legacy?
At 02:33 21-7-2011, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 07/20/2011 05:02 PM, e-letter wrote: On the users mailing list, a significant proportion of a random view of questions seems to be with relation to using LO is some way with m$ document formats. (...) I might also conclude that there is NO reason to support any other file format either. I mean, really, why should I support a non-ODF format? PDF generation? Remove it! (...) Please don't remove PDF generation. That would be the end of the only free and open-source PDF generator that produces tagged PDF, which is a requirement for accessibility. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ 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] LibreOffice Conference Promo video - Be there!
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 20:08:15 -0400, drew wrote: Hi, I would like to introduce a second LibreOffice Conference Promo videos - Be there! I'll be there. I'm making two presentations tomorrow, one in French and one in English, both on accessible authoring and generating DAISY and Braille from LibreOffice OpenOffice.org Writer: http://2011.rmll.info/-Sante-accessibilite-et-handicap-?lang=fr. Best regards, Christophe The video is currently playing at: http://youtube.com/libreofficevols channel A master copy of the video, in multiple formats, is here, feel free to download a copy: http://lo-portal.us/temp/conference/LibreOffice-Conference-Be_there.ogg http://lo-portal.us/temp/conference/LibreOffice-Conference-Be_there.mp4 (Both files are full 1080i resolution, so if you open directly in a browser be sure to zoom out... ;-) Best wishes, //drew -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] test mail
Some of my mails never reach the list... -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Hi Christian, All, At 23:16 4-6-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi Allen, *, On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Allen Pulsifer pulsi...@openoffice.org wrote: [...] I don't know what vision IBM has for the project. I don't know what code contribution they are going to make--I'm certain they will make some, but I don't know what they will be. I don't know what contributions members of the LibreOffice community will or will not want to make. Given that they had 35 people working on it according to their press releases, that was ended up in OOo was basically nonexistent. As you've been with the OOo project for a couple of years you can probably understand that people that were part of OOo project before switching over to TDF/LibreOffice don't have much trust in IBM's lip service. The few times they did contribute, it was code-dumping, far from contributing in a collaborative manner. The accessibility stuff that Rob just mentioned on the apache list has been promised since 2007 and he correctly stated that is is still (considerable) amount of /work/ needed to get it integrated. They dumped it instead of contributing it. To me that's still a difference. The code is against an obsolete branch (OOo 1.1.5 codeline (!)) http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Accessibility/IAccessible2_support I am surprised nobody has responded to this (since there is/was at least one IBM employee on this list...). The accessibility contribution that Rob Weir referred to was probably not the code dump for OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 but a contribution to OpenOffice.org 3.1 (if I remember correctly). See my comment at http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice.html#comment-20026. (Note: OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 was released in September 2005; IAccessible2 was released in December 2006 http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/20773.wss.) At this moment I know no one at Oracle who can or wants to say how much of the IAccessible2 implementation will end up in OpenOffice.org 3.4. Best regards, Christophe Strobbe I do know this however. There is currently an open invitation for us to get involved. If we get involved, we can have a say in with direction of the project. Not really, as you first have to surrender to the Apache's licence terms. And that alone is reason for me not to join the effort. We can ensure that direction of the project provides the maximum benefit for LibreOffice, which includes any contributions from IBM. Basically, we can get IBM working for us. I really doubt it. What would change for them now, with the permissive licence, that did prevent them in the last 5 years from contributing? They (according to their press release) had massive manpower working on it (35 people), but what ended up in OOo is two code dumps to ancient codeline, one of which being lotuswordprofilter, the other the abovementioned accessibility dump. (...) ciao Christian -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Hi Christian, All, At 16:14 5-7-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: Hi Christoph, *, On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be wrote: At 23:16 4-6-2011, Christian Lohmaier wrote: The few times they did contribute, it was code-dumping, far from contributing in a collaborative manner. The accessibility stuff that Rob just mentioned on the apache list has been promised since 2007 and he correctly stated that is is still (considerable) amount of /work/ needed to get it integrated. They dumped it instead of contributing it. To me that's still a difference. The code is against an obsolete branch (OOo 1.1.5 codeline (!)) http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Accessibility/IAccessible2_support I am surprised nobody has responded to this (since there is/was at least one IBM employee on this list...). The accessibility contribution that Rob Weir referred to was probably not the code dump for OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 but a contribution to OpenOffice.org 3.1 Well, as seen on this list (by Malte's post), apparently there has been work on a *private* cws that nobody in the community (and yes, people who are working on private cws are not part of the community in this regard - they are of course for that part of their work that happens in public) All promises IBM is making/has made so far is only lip service for me. I only believe it after I see the actual contributions from them. (And as written I don't consider code dumps that need a man-year of work to get integrated as contribution) If Oracle asks IBM to implement IAccessible2 on version 3.1 and releases OpenOffice.org 3.2 before IBM has submitted the IAccessible2 implementation, how is IBM to blame? Between 3.1 and 3.2 the code had changed and had been moved to another type of repository. That is the reason for the complex and time-consuming integration work that Oracle needed to do for IAccessible2. The integration and testing were still in progress when Oracle decided to stop investing in OpenOffice.org. As far as I know, that is why the IAccessible2 code did not end up in public repositories. (if I remember correctly). See my comment at http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice.html#comment-20026. (Note: OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 was released in September 2005; IAccessible2 was released in December 2006 http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/20773.wss.) Yes, and that makes it even more pointless to dump the code against the OOo 1.1.5 codeline. The contribution to the 1.1.5 codeline is irrelevant because completely outdated. I added that note merely as backgound information. Not against the version that is in current development, but to a codeline that is basically done for since two years. (again the commitment statment is from 2007) It is all about the preception of IBM's past contributions to OOo - and those are, despite the massive amount of developers assigned to the project (35 developers, in the announcement from 2007, the same figure stated in the incubation list) is nonexistant basically. Know we know that there has been a behind-the-doors code contribution of the IA2 stuff (or who knows, maybe Sun/Oracle engineers did all the work themselves porting the dump to current codeline, doesn't matter really). If Sun/Oracle engineers state that IBM donated the IAccessible2 implementation, it is unlikely that this piece of work was done by Sun/Oracle. But what else did IBM do in the last 4/5 years? At this moment I know no one at Oracle who can or wants to say how much of the IAccessible2 implementation will end up in OpenOffice.org 3.4. Well, then you missed Malte Timmermann's post. Yes, I missed that. (Curiously, he sent that message from a private address, not an Oracle address.) (about the status of iaccessible2), As Rob is strongly against releasing OOo 3.4 with the blessing of the apache-OOo project (take that discussion to the old OOo-lists basically (paraphrased)), I doubt there will be a OOo 3.4.0 at all. If that is true, that will be a loss for the accessibility of OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice on Windows. Best regards, Christophe http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3c4df3a2e8.8010...@gmx.com%3E http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3c4df3a100.2060...@gmx.com%3E (he posted the very same mail twice) Actually the status with IA2 in OOo is quite good - but not in public CWSes yet - I am quite sure it will find it's way to Apache OOo. And until there is a release of Apache-OOo that is comparable in features/functionality to the current OOo codebase: This will take quite a bit of time. Oracle's staff didn't even manage to report the size of current bugzilla's database as has been requested by the Apache-infrastructure team yet. An open question since June 17. Three weeks and still no answer to the simple question: We are looking for more detail about the size
Re: [tdf-discuss] OpenOffice dead and burried?
Hi, On Tue, 17 May 2011 03:49:42 -0700 (PDT), plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Since Oracle discontinued commercial development of the OpenOffice suite, and is handling it back to the open-source community for future development and the open-source community moved to LibreOffice, what future is there for OpenOffice? http://www.betanews.com/article/Oracle-hands-OpenOffice-to-opensource-community-gives-up-commercial-sales/1303142878 This was over a month ago. There hasn't been a new OOo build since Dev300m106 back in April 4th and 3.4 Beta in April 11th... Does this mean that no new code has been released either? I am asking this question because I am still hoping that the IAccessible2 implementation that IBM donated to Oracle last year and that Oracle was integrating and testing, will still get released somehow. IBM cannot say yet whether they would do the same exercise again if the IAccessible2 implementation does not get released (maybe they are also waiting for more announcements from Oracle at the end of this month). I have reasons to hope (I am not sure if I can disclose why) that the IAccessible2 implementation will be made available; LibreOffice could then access it too. The IAccessible2 implementation is a considerable piece of work, without which OpenOffice.org (and LibreOffice) remains poorly accessible to screen reader users on MS Windows. What do they mean by handing it back? Are they giving up on the OpenOffice brand? My contacts at Oracle have not made any statements about that. I am waiting for another press release. Best regards, Christophe Can someone from TDF shed some light? -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Custom properties
Hi, On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:54:55 -0700 (PDT), rise_mini meenakshi.kanau...@gmail.com wrote: I am using Libreoffice 3.3.2. I have created one document having custom properties. Properties are preserved in .odt format. But when i save as the same document with .doc format all the custom properties have gone. Are the custom properties only lost after exporting to .DOC or are they lost when you simply close the .ODT file? There is a bug for Writer not recognising the addition of custom properties as a file change: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32177: Bug 32177 - Writer does not perceive addition of custom document properties as a change for saving. Best regards, Christophe Strobbe Why it is happening ? It was working fine with openoffice 3.2. Thanks, rise_mini -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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: LibreOffice Math: There is no
On Wed, 4 May 2011 19:17:45 +0100, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: Olivier Hallot olivier.hal...@documentfoundation.org wrote in message news:4dc180b3.6020...@documentfoundation.org... Em 04-05-2011 13:11, M Henri Day escreveu: (...) Olivier, in Linux operating systems such as, e g, Ubuntu, symbols like the ∄ symbol can easily be inserted in a LibreOffice document by holding the Ctrl and Shift keys and pressing u (Ctrl+Shift+u) and then typing the hexdecimal code (in this case) 2204 and pressing the space bar. But I agree, this type of logic symbol should certainly be included in the list of special characters in LibreOffice Math Henri Hi Yes, in a Mandriva system as well, although I run out of fingers to type such key combination!! Does not work in Windows... See http://www.fileformat.info/tip/microsoft/enter_unicode.htm for ways of entering Unicode characters in Windows. Method 1 works for me in Math and also works in Writer provided I first choose the OpenSymbol font. I have used method 4 (Alt+x in MS Word) in the past and would really appreciate it if this feature were added to LibreOffice Writer. Best regards, Christophe Harold Fuchs London -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Question about proposing the creation of a new format
Hi Ben, Sorry for my late response; it seems I missed this mail last Friday. On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:02:17 +1000, Ben McGinnes b...@adversary.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 28/04/11 9:28 PM, Christophe Strobbe wrote: On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:49:11 +1000, Ben McGinnes b...@adversary.org wrote: I hadn't even heard of DAISY, but it looks very cool so thanks for pointing me at it. I just installed the extension and will have a little play with it at some nebulous point in the future. Great :-) (I am involved in the development of odt2daisy.) Cool. Since then I've tried it on a couple of things and it is pretty nifty. Although I should really poke around for some decent DAISY software readers/players to see (and hear) how others would experience any given thing. There is a list of software-based DAISY players in the Wikipedia article on DAISY: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAISY_Digital_Talking_Book#Software_players. I try to update it when I find something new. Hardware DAISY players also exist, but they aren't cheap. Since this thread mentions both ePub and DAISY I would like to point out that the IDPF (in charge of ePub) and the DAISY Consortium are working on a stronger convergence between the two formats. snip This means that ePub 3 will contain more features to support accessibility for people with disabilities than in previous versions. (DAISY was designed for persons with reading impairments from the outset.) This is what caught my attention with DAISY and why I'm now looking forward to ePub 3. It's a great example of where ebooks can level the field for everyone. I remember when I was a kid and already reading voraciously that my Nan did too. Unfortunately her eyesight was very bad, so the only books she could read were the large print books available at the local library and she couldn't read everything she wanted to. This always struck me as most unfair. We finally have the technology to render this situation a thing of the past and we should do so. But it also means that whatever content you put into an ePub doc will need features to make that type of content accessible. For many types of content (images, video, audio) this involves the use of text alternatives. Making math and science accessible is still a challenge, in spite of many years of research. 3D was also mentioned in this thread - I don't know how that would be made accessible. Fortunately for me my interest is essentially text only (regardless of whether it is fiction or non-fiction). So I don't have to worry so much about any of these, but it is definitely something to bear in mind and work on. When it comes to books, PDF is only really useful for type-setting a print book (e.g. the way Lulu uses them for preparing print on demand books). I think tagged PDF with reflow options in PDF readers (see one of my previous mails) changed that a bit. Adobe Reader even has a Read Out Loud function (but you will need to get used to synthetic speech). Since I've used PDF for the odd report (the last one was an anti-censorship thing), that's something I'll have to keep in mind for next time. Also for the political stuff. It takes a little time to prepare all the relevant formats, but compared to the process of writing, proofing and editing, not really all that much. If you want a decent DAISY book, you will need (at the very least) to make sure that you use the correct styles for headings (to enable navigation) and that you mark the language(s) in the content correctly. Appropriate use of styles and headings was already looking like it would be necessary for ePub and other things anyway. I take it with regards to the language marking you're referring to specifying the language for a document or paragraph (rather than just the default language of LibreOffice), right? Yes, that is correct. Is there a guide somewhere of the right document/page/paragraph attributes needed to generate decent DAISY documents? I made a presentation about this at FOSDEM in February of this year. My slides are on Slideshare at http://www.slideshare.net/aegisproject/fosdem-2011-a11y-authoring-libre-office but I can also send them off-list. There is more detailed guidance on accessible authoring (not geared at DAISY) from the Accessible Digital Office Document (ADOD) Project: http://adod.idrc.ocad.ca/. Their techniques for OpenOffice.org also apply to LibreOffice. (And they also cover MS Word, Google Docs, Corel WordPerfect, iWork; it's an impressive set of documents.) Best regards, Christophe Regards, Ben -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEAREKAAYFAk26RlkACgkQNxrFv6BK4xPnCACfQ7qw5EbSJXy2jcj921Te8SCb rXgAoOgGOBwi9NIEVqU+dQnHUwRqw6YD =+61B -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research
Re: [tdf-discuss] Question about proposing the creation of a new format
Hi, On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:42:27 +1000, Ben McGinnes b...@adversary.org wrote: On 25/04/11 7:11 PM, drew wrote: As far as LibreOffice being a display client for ebooks, I would agree it is not in scope. However, should LibreOffice have support for producing documents targeted to eReaders? I don't know maybe, probably. The writer2epub extension does a reasonably good job of that already, although I'd follow it up with editing in Sigil and probably final tweaking in Calibre. There is also a (commercial) ODFToEPub extension: http://www.pincette.biz/odftoepub/index.xhtml, http://www.pincette.biz/odftoepub/release_notes.txt. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Question about proposing the creation of a new format
Hi, On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:53:00 +0200, Christian Lohmaier lohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi Ben, *, On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Ben McGinnes b...@adversary.org wrote: On 25/04/11 7:11 PM, drew wrote: As far as LibreOffice being a display client for ebooks, I would agree it is not in scope. However, should LibreOffice have support for producing documents targeted to eReaders? I don't know maybe, probably. The writer2epub extension does a reasonably good job of that already, although I'd follow it up with editing in Sigil and probably final tweaking in Calibre. There is also http://odt2daisy.sourceforge.net/ - in case your reader supports the daisy format. Other than that: what would be a special requirement for eReaders? I know PDF is suboptimal because it needs to scale to the display screen. (...) I don't know what software is used on eReaders, but Adobe Reader on the desktop supports reflow when you zoom in: press Crtl+4 (or go to View - Zoom - Reflow in the menus). To zoom in, simply press Crtl++ (like in many current browsers). Note that this requires tagged PDF. LibreOffice can output tagged PDF when you check that option in the PDF Options dialog that is displayed when you choose Export as PDF Adobe Reader has more accessibility options under Edit Preferences Accessibility; for example: Always use Zoom Setting, and Replace Document Colors (which allows users to override the colours defined by the author). So when you use properly tagged PDF, is is probably not the format itself that is at fault but the reader (=software). Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Question about proposing the creation of a new format
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:19:50 +0200, CaStarCo casta...@gmail.com wrote: There is a draft of the EPUB3 specification ( http://idpf.org/news/epub-3-specification-public-draft-released ), I think that this spec has many problems: Since this is a draft specification: has anyone tried sending comments? (Unfortunately, I don't see a real *invitation* for comments, which is unlike the process used for ODF, W3C specs, ...). Best regards, Christophe the capability of scripting (wich is potentially harmful), the low emphasis on semantic data (they use metadata, but specially related to the book structure, not with its content), to forget the 3d models type of media (epub3 only supports images, video and sound, but not 3d models wich the user could explore), and the absence of profiles (they talk about fallbacks, but only for scripting, not for media content). I suppose there are good reasons to choose that spec and not an extended one... but at that moment, I can imagine which reasons are. I think that would be interesting to program an ebook editor, to promote the EPUB use over other privative formats. Many lacks of the EPUB format can be covered with scripting, but hidding the scripting to the user, doing it automaticly behind the scene. If there are interested people, then I'm interested on helping working on webkit integration. Kind regards 2011/4/25 Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com On 04/25/2011 11:11 AM, drew wrote: However, should LibreOffice have support for producing documents targeted to eReaders? I don't know maybe, probably. I am not an expert on ebooks formats, but I know there are a lot of efforts around the ePub format to become a standard. Unfortunately, there are too many commercial interests around ebooks today for the development of a real independent standard. Anyway, should such a standard be defined and accepted, I would personally be in favour of supporting it, as documents are becoming more pervasive than in the past and in the future will be accessed through a multitude of devices (many of them being mobile). Best regards, Italo -- Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com mobile +39.348.5653829 VoIP +39.02.320621813 skype italovignoli -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Question about proposing the creation of a new format
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:49:11 +1000, Ben McGinnes b...@adversary.org wrote: On 25/04/11 8:53 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: There is also http://odt2daisy.sourceforge.net/ - in case your reader supports the daisy format. I hadn't even heard of DAISY, but it looks very cool so thanks for pointing me at it. I just installed the extension and will have a little play with it at some nebulous point in the future. Great :-) (I am involved in the development of odt2daisy.) Since this thread mentions both ePub and DAISY I would like to point out that the IDPF (in charge of ePub) and the DAISY Consortium are working on a stronger convergence between the two formats. (It is no coincidence that two of the editors of the ePub spec at http://idpf.org/epub/30/spec/epub30-overview.html represent the DAISY Consortium). This means that ePub 3 will contain more features to support accessibility for people with disabilities than in previous versions. (DAISY was designed for persons with reading impairments from the outset.) But it also means that whatever content you put into an ePub doc will need features to make that type of content accessible. For many types of content (images, video, audio) this involves the use of text alternatives. Making math and science accessible is still a challenge, in spite of many years of research. 3D was also mentioned in this thread - I don't know how that would be made accessible. Other than that: what would be a special requirement for eReaders? I can't speak for anyone else, but as long as an eReader can display content as it would in a normal book then it's good enough. If that book is a novel, then it will usually be pretty easy (e.g. text, italics, bold, small capitals, subscript, superscript and maybe footnotes). If that book is a text book (e.g. a science book) with charts, formula, pictures, etc.) then more may be required. I know PDF is suboptimal because it needs to scale to the display screen. When it comes to books, PDF is only really useful for type-setting a print book (e.g. the way Lulu uses them for preparing print on demand books). I think tagged PDF with reflow options in PDF readers (see one of my previous mails) changed that a bit. Adobe Reader even has a Read Out Loud function (but you will need to get used to synthetic speech). plain text might be boring to read (headings, etc hard to spot, lack of structural information for navigation), rtf might not be supported by the reader... Well, I wouldn't opt for either of those formats. So there probably is no one-size-fits all solution. And it depends on what the purpose is: personal use (i.e. conversion of random documents) or dedicated publishing (aim is to write a book and publish it) and thus how many restrictions you can impose on the structure/formatting of the document. Exactly. At this stage most ebook publishers, including self-publishers, usually need at least two or three formats for each publication and often more. Until your post I was considering PDF, ePub, Kindle (.mobi) and maybe one or two others (.lit and whatever Sony uses). Now you can add DAISY to the list too. It takes a little time to prepare all the relevant formats, but compared to the process of writing, proofing and editing, not really all that much. If you want a decent DAISY book, you will need (at the very least) to make sure that you use the correct styles for headings (to enable navigation) and that you mark the language(s) in the content correctly. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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] Oracle gives up on OpenOffice.org
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:37:31 +0200, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com wrote: I am not sure this is the place to post this, but here is an article that might be worth posting somewhere with other articles about LibreOffice http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2011/04/oracle-gives-up-on-ooo-after-community-forks-the-project.ars LONG LIVE LIBRE OFFICE :) Indeed. My earlier question about the Oracle Contributor Agreement seems moot now. (Oracle also removed its Cloud Office product page from its website [1]. I bet that jokes about vapourware are just around the corner.) Best regards, Christophe [1] http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Oracle-OpenOffice-org-to-become-a-Community-based-Project-Update-1228831.html -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 www.docarch.be Twitter: @RabelaisA11y -- 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: Help with telling the story Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility: What's the story?
At 18:59 16/02/2011, drew wrote: On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 17:30 +, Michael Meeks wrote: Hi Joanie, On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 16:24 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: * Is there an active a11y team and/or developers focused on a11y issues in LibreOffice? Sure there are people with a focus on this. I am not sure if we actually can speak of 'a team'. Quite - whether there is a team at OO.o is a similar question ;-) there are people who can help fix problems. From ORCA's perspective, I created the design, prototype, and ~50% of the existing atk bridge in vcl; so I wouldn't fret that we are skill-less in this area :-) Furthermore, it is far easier to work on LibreOffice process-wise to get fixes in, so I anticipate (over time) a better accessibility experience; and of course we welcome patches (on the dev list). Hi, If I may change the subject here for a moment. When lasted I noted any comment on the OO.o lists with regard to the IAccessibilty code coming from IBM, IIRC, the comment was that it was 'not yet integrated' - I don't know if that is still true. As far as I know, the IAccessible2 code is in the OOo repository but not in the main trunk. At FOSDEM (two week ago), Malte Timmermann could not give a date when the integration (and testing) would be finished: It will be done when it's done. (See my summary at http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/accessibility/msg00034.html.) Best regards, Christophe From LibreOffice stand point, I am not sure I have heard what the plan is, would that integration be merged here? (if the answer is still don't know till we see it - that's a valid answer) I remember watching the session on accessibility at the last OOoConn and I know there was a MS rep there, as I remember you had some small interaction. I'm don't know then if your (the dev teams) thoughts are to look for the integration coming via OO.o/IBM or if you are looking at going a different route. Please don't feel you need to respond directly - if there are some references already (other emails, blogs) it would be great if anyone could point in the direction of those. This next period there are number of shows in the US and the question of accessibility is treated quite directly in this area. I was thinking of trying to create a small reference piece for the booth staff at the shows with some information on this subject (within this next 2 weeks - to make the first show): LIbreOffice support for accessibility technologies (current and future) [or something similar] I'm starting with the assumption that anything relating to OO.o 3.3 would be correct also for Libo 3.3 - correct assumption? Beyond that - I'm not asking for a direct response here to this email, but if that assumption is not correct, or there are actual plans for a different direction for integration it would be much appreciated if anyone could direct some links my way, I will read and assemble a smaller flyer type piece, then ask folks to review it. Thanks for your time, Drew -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Help with telling the story Re: Accessibility: What's the story?
At 09:28 17/02/2011, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 16/02/11 18:59, drew a écrit : I also have some vague recollection that the state of Massachusetts migration to OOo was rejected because of the lack of accessibility tools at the time, a requirement under that state's procurement laws. So the topic is an important one, especially if LibreOffice wants to get a foothold in US government institutions. The ODF format itself also needed better accessibility. So the ODF committee at OASIS created an Accessibility subcommittee to tackle the issue: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office-accessibility. There are a number OpenOffice.org/LibreOffice bugs related to ODF accessibility features, for example: * Image title and description that disappear after adding a caption in Writer: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32137 * Image title and description that disappear when you modify the image anchor in Writer * Image title and description are not exported when exporting PDF from Impress: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34135 Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi, I have a question about licences and copyright. As many of you know, contributing code to the core of OpenOffice.org requires that one signs the Oracle Contributor Agreement [1] (which is identical to the Sun Contributor Agreement). Extensions are exempt from this [2]. 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? 2. Conversely, if I sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit code (and it gets accepted, otherwise the copyright reverts to me), can I then still submit the same code to LibreOffice or would that cause problems for LibreOffice (because Oracle now shares copyright of the code I submitted)? 2.b. Can I contribute the code to LibreOffice while the acceptance of my patch to OpenOffice.org is still pending? These are important questions for developers who don't want to take sides for or against OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice. If this has already been clarified in a wiki somewhere, please let me know. (I have searched the web but I haven't found any info on this.) [1] http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Oracle_Contributor_Agreement [2] http://www.openoffice.org/FAQs/faq-licensing.html#usinglicenses: Licensing FAQ: Contributing Works Best regards, Christophe PS: As long as this issue has not been clarified, certain contributions will be published as an extension instead of a submission to the core. -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility: What's the story?
Hi, These are important questions that I also wanted to ask, especially in the light of IBM's contribution of an IAccessible2 implementation to OpenOffice.org, which would significantly improve accessibility on Windows. After describing what I know about OOo accessibility on Windows on the LibO accessibility mailing list [1], one of the questions that I am interested in is whether that IAccessible2 implementation would also become available in LibreOffice or whether it would have to be redeveloped from scratch for LibreOffice (due to copyright / IP reasons, because I can't think of anything else). [1] http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/accessibility/msg00034.html Best regards, Christophe At 21:55 15/02/2011, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: Hey all. A question I've been wondering, and that Orca users are wondering, and that the GNOME accessibility team is wondering is: What's the story with LibreOffice accessibility? In particular: * Is the fork so complete that fixes made in OOo will not even be seen -- or incorporated into LibreOffice even if they are seen? Or * Are things from OOo still being cherry picked for inclusion in LibreOffice -- or would be if they were pointed out via bugzilla? Also: * Is there an active a11y team and/or developers focused on a11y issues in LibreOffice? And, yeah, I know: It's open source. And getting and building the code is a zillion times easier than is the case with OOo (for which I'm truly grateful). So I should just submit patches. :-) Let's pretend we've already had that discussion with the conclusion being that I sincerely promise to contribute as soon as I get caught up on my DayJob, Orca work, GNOME 3 issues, etc., etc. In meantime What's the story w.r.t. the questions above? Oh, and yes, I already inquired on the accessibility list a couple of months ago. No one there seems to know and the only advice I got was to file bugs in both issue trackers. Thus if any of y'all can shed light on the situation it would be super. Thanks in advance! --joanie Orca project lead GNOME accessibility team -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] OpenOffice.org articles in Linux Format March 2011
At 21:46 11/02/2011, David Nelson wrote: On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 21:03, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be wrote: (*) None of these articles mention LibrOffice, although the review says: developers are falling away like pine needles from a Christmas tree and competitors are making inroads to its market. Could you please clarify whether it's from the OOo project or LibreOffice project that developers are falling away like pine needles from a Christmas tree? The statement comes from a review of OpenOffice.org 3.3; it is about OpenOffice.org. Although the reviewer must be aware of LibreOffice, I found it strange that he doesn't mention any of the OOo competitors by name. You didn't give any link to the article you were referring to, and a search for libreoffice on the Linux Format site returned nothing, otherwise I would have read for myself. I simply bought the printed edition. By the way, the cover DVD contains neither OpenOffice.org nor LibreOffice. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Extensions for LibreOffice
Hi, At 10:51 11/02/2011, you wrote: Pls anyone show me links to get extensions for LibreOffice. Sorry I couldn't find them anywhere. There're some intergrated to the setup package, but not enough. There are lists like http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/DE/LibreOffice-Box_Extensions (in German) and http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FR/LibreOffice-Box_Extensions (in French), but I am not aware of a similar list in English, except the one at http://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:OpenOfficeExtensions/List, which is really a list of OpenOffice.org extensions. Are OpenOffice.org extensions fully compatible with LibreOffice? I hope they are, but if the Document Foundation decides to reduce the dependence on Java, I would like to know how this will affect the development of extensions. (I am involved in three extensions myself.) Best regards, Christophe Many thanks! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the Meaning of access in manifesto
Hi, At 22:28 8/02/2011, Johannes A. Bodwing wrote: Hello, what does access mean in the manifesto: to eliminate the digital divide in society by giving everyone access to office productivity tools free of charge to enable them to participate as full citizens in the 21st century Is it only the possibility for someone to download from TDF/LO-Sites or a more active way like a distribution by pre-installed LO on PC too? What does TDF really/precisely understand with access? There is one other meaning of access that has not been diccussed in this thread: accessibility for persons with disabilities. In this sense, inaccessible software is software that does not implement an accessibility API [1], that does not allow full keyboard access, that does not inherit desktop themes (colour combinations, large text icons, ...), etcetera. Inaccessible software creates or contributes to a digital divide between people with disabilities and other users. This would affect, for example, 18.7% of the US population (in 2005 [2]), so it is not a marginal phenomenon. Elderly users often have similar needs, as their vision, hearing and mobility decreases with age (but they don't want to be considered as people with disabilities, it's all just part of getting old). I assume you are all aware of the demographic shift in many countries [3]. In addition to this, some governments (e.g. the US federal government) are not allowed to buy inaccessible software. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Accessibility_API [2] http://www.practicalecommerce.com/articles/1417-Accessibility-How-Many-Disabled-Web-Users-Are-There- [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-wai-age-literature-20080514/. Best regards, Christophe Strobbe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Features enterprises will love to have in LibreOffice
At 11:48 19/01/2011, Jaime R. Garza wrote: Hello, I believe the best feature for the enterprise will be to port LibreOffice to HTML5, this could be also installed locally in the clients, needing just a browser to run. If LibreOffice doesn't go in direction WebBased, it will be soon irrelevant in the enterprise (...) The enterprise is not the only (potential) user of LibreOffice. There is a significant part of the world that does not want to or cannot depend on network connections for every type of work, e.g. because not everyone is on the Internet [1] or because they have their own reasons for not using software as a service. [1] http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats1.htm, http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats3.htm Best regards, Christophe Strobbe Cheers! On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:23, Olivier Hallot olivier.hal...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi I have collected some features enteprises will love to have implemented in LibreOffice and listed them in http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Crazy_Ideas#Features_Enterprises_Will_Love_To_Have_Implemented Some are quite easy to implement, other may require a longer time for development, but all are based on real demand from people that use LibreOffice in a enterprise production environment. That is, they are not crazy ideas at all. :-) Regards -- Olivier Hallot Founder, Steering Commitee Member - The Document Foundation -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] A better idea for a download package.
At 21:03 30/11/2010, Charles Marcus wrote: (...) The current size problem as compared to OOo is because all of the language packs are included... and this situation is only temporary until storage is no longer an issue... After all the negative comments on the download size in this old thread, I would like to say something positive: as a developer of LibreOffice/OpenOffice.org extensions, I find the availability of language packs in the download excellent: it enables me to switch between interface languages in LibreOffice without the need to install several language versions of the same office suite. This is great if you want to check localised versions of extensions. However, I realise this is only a minority use case. Best regards, Christophe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Co-working with Moz, etc
Hi Jaime, At 17:52 6/01/2011, Jaime R. Garza wrote: i think it would be great to have a HTML5 LO, which will only need a browser. The could be installed locallz or on a server. There would only be need for one version that supports the 4 major browsers. Are you aware of WebODF http://www.webodf.org/? It was presented at the ODF Plugfest in Brussels in October last year. See http://lwn.net/Articles/409957/ (browse down to ODF on the web.) (I know it uses XHTML 1.0 Strict instead of HTML5.) Best regards, Christophe At least we should start with a ODF reader, it doesn't have to be a plugin, it can be a HTML5 application. On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:00, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: What would be better if more difficult would be to have a Writer/Calc plugin to Firefox using the extensions so you could have a WP or SS as an extension to your web browser. Since in Europe Firefox is reported to have displaced IE as the most popular browser that would provide an immediate route to lots of users. Google pay Mozilla to have their search as the default because of the number of Firefox users for a reason. -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Bug in LibreOffice RC2 (Impress)
Hi Axel, At 14:58 5/01/2011, Axel Reimer wrote: Hello, I just opened an old presentation and recognized a display bug. Reproduction: 1. Create a new Impress Presentation 2. Draw a rectangle. 3. Right-Click on the rectangle and click area. 4. Choose gradients 5. For type select axial 6. For angle select 90 degrees. 7. Click ok. 8. The area of the rectangle is displayed correctly. 9. Now start the presentation and the color of the rectangle will be incorrect. Tested with Ubuntu 10.04 and LibreOffice RC2. Can anyone reproduce this bug with the same or a different operating system? I remember that OpenOffice.org once had this bug, too (some time ago) but it was fixed. I tried to reproduce the bug in Windows XP SP 3 (UK English edition) with LibreOffice 3.3.0 - OOO330m17 (Build: 3). The colour is still the same but the gradient appears as linear instead of axial. Is that what you meant? Best regards, Christophe Strobbe -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the status bar
Hi, At 10:50 30/11/2010, Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi, 2010/11/30 Jih-Yao Lin jih...@gmail.com what is the WW8Num3 below the writer? I'm not sure what you're talking about. Which number below Writer? At which position is it in the status bar? In my status bar is the following (from left to right): Field with page numbers - style (default) - language (German) - INSRT (or Overwrite)- STD (marking of text) - Notifier about my document being changed - Notifier about digital signature - selector for how to display pages - zoom selector (with a slide) - zoom selector (numerical value). WW8Num3 seems to be a list style; you can find it in the Styles and Formatting widget when you click the button for List Styles (i.e. the button at the top, not the item List Styles in the menu at the bottom). When you use it, you will see WW8Num3 in the status bar: in OpenOffice.org Writer it will be in the field between Digital Signature and the selector for how to display pages. Best regards, Christophe Is it normal in writer? I'd say my above list is pretty normal for Writer. Can you describe, where you have something different? I am using LO in chinese. I am using LibO in English. Sigrid -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
