Hi,
I talked with Itzhak Mintz yesterday. He told me several things:
1. The only windows specific bit in Qtext is that certain classes
inherit from a class for a generic window (something called hwindow).
Everything else (including buttons, menus, fonts ...) is their own. I
guess
this, please email me.
As I have some exprience with both BiDi and Object-Pascal/Delphi, and
think QText 5.5 was the best word-processor, ever, I'd be happy to
volunteer for this job.
Shay.
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL
a few important issues.
Well, if you have the additional information that your character is a
r2l character (even if it is a space or parentheses), this can help you
decide what to do. I actually saw how both Backspace and selection work
in QText, and it seems to work great.
Neither of them
work
in QText, and it seems to work great.
Neither of them made sense to me. Furthermore, Qtext conforms to the
Win3.1 language switching convention, right-alt-shift always switches to Hebrew
while left-alt-shift always switches to English, while Win9x uses both
alt-shift simply as switch
support in Qtext is significantly
better than in M$ word.
Word8 (that is: Word97), you mean.
if so, I'm not really sure what good will releasing _the source_ to public
domain will do, at least for law-abiding entities ( {persons} \subset
{entities} ... :) ).
If , OTOH
its own Hebrew support or does it use
Windows Hebrew support?
QText uses direct GDI calls for everything - it even draws its own
fonts. that way you can have hebrew (and other languages- the last
version I worked with supported over 30 languages) even on english only
windows. I think
not hinder efforts
to release the source.
I, for one, am willing to donate a modest amount (~100 shekels) for the
explicit
purpose of releasing the source (unburdened by patents) to public domain.
Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
Hi,
When I was a kid, I used a word processor called Qtext on my dos
machine
On Wed, Sep 25, 2002, Guy Baruch wrote about Re: Qtext:
+---
+ Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue.
+ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ phone: 972-8-934-2211
about
it. I think that when he released the first versions, people were not
patenting algorithms, and I don't think he ever published the algorithm,
so my guess is that they are not patented. I'll ask him. Anyway, he
claims (and I believe him) that bidi support in Qtext is significantly
better than in M
Guy Baruch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I assume bidi support is really better than in current products, are
the algorithms patented ?
I presume that Qtext dates back to the blissful old days when
algorithms could not be patented...
--
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
When I was a kid, I used a word processor called Qtext on my dos
machine. It was a freeware written by an Israeli guy, and had a better
(by far) bidi support than any alternative I knew.
Yesterday, I discovered that I work with the guy who wrote it in the
same room. He told me that Qtext
On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 11:19, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
My question is, is there someone who might want to fund it?
Get us a number and we'll see how reasonable it is. Maybe we can have a
'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
Gilad.
--
Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
make
the source code worthless.
Regards,
- yba
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
Hi,
When I was a kid, I used a word processor called Qtext on my dos
machine. It was a freeware written by an Israeli guy, and had a better
(by far) bidi support than any alternative I knew.
Yesterday
do you think trhat porting QText to Linux is really feasible and worth the effort?
i agree that the bidi support there was excellent, and i used to work with qtext for
years, but qt's bidi support has become pretty mature, and i'm not sure if it's worth
the effort of porting MFC or whatever
to portability. This would make
the source code worthless.
Regards,
- yba
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
Hi,
When I was a kid, I used a word processor called Qtext on my dos
machine. It was a freeware written by an Israeli guy, and had a better
(by far) bidi support than any
* Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020924 11:40]:
On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 11:19, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
My question is, is there someone who might want to fund it?
Get us a number and we'll see how reasonable it is. Maybe we can have a
'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
Well
and koffice about two months ago, and openoffice with some hebrew
patch), it was even worse than M$ word, which is a nightmare by itself.
Perhaps I missed something or maybe things have drastically improved
since then, but otherwise I believe QText would be a big improvement. I
agree it isn't worth
a
'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
Well, when I asked him, he said `we can talk'. Basically, I think it's a
matter of negotiation, and to negotiate we need someone who at least
might *possibly* buy the sources (definitely not me...).
Moshe
You better do a code review with someone
might want to fund it?
|
|Get us a number and we'll see how reasonable it is. Maybe we can have a
|'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
|
|
|Well, when I asked him, he said `we can talk'. Basically, I think it's a
|matter of negotiation, and to negotiate we need someone who at least
|might
it is. Maybe we can have a
|'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
|
|
|Well, when I asked him, he said `we can talk'. Basically, I think it's a
|matter of negotiation, and to negotiate we need someone who at least
|might *possibly* buy the sources (definitely not me...).
|
|Moshe
it is. Maybe we can have a
'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
Well, when I asked him, he said `we can talk'. Basically, I think it's a
matter of negotiation, and to negotiate we need someone who at least
might *possibly* buy the sources (definitely not me...).
Does anyone still buy it? Does
wrote:
|
|My question is, is there someone who might want to fund it?
|
|Get us a number and we'll see how reasonable it is. Maybe we can have a
|'Free Qtext!' funraiser or something... :-)
|
|
|Well, when I asked him, he said `we can talk'. Basically, I think it's a
|matter of negotiation
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:50:07PM +0300, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
I guess a relevant bit of information here is that this program is
written in Delphi, which is some variant of Pascal.
In this case I guess porting is quite a big project.
Unless you use Borland's lovely Kylix (Delphi's spin
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
Hi,
Of course, this is an important question. I just thought that the first
question is whether we have any chance of getting the source. Since you
say that someone might possibly fund it, I'll try to dig some more
details from the guy when I
, September 24, 2002 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Qtext
Hi,
Of course, this is an important question. I just thought that the first
question is whether we have any chance of getting the source. Since you
say that someone might possibly fund it, I'll try to dig some more
details from the guy when I
Kylix Open Edition is free.
Check Borland site.
Oleg.
- Original Message -
From: Dan Kenigsberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: Qtext
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:50:07PM +0300, Moshe Kaminsky wrote:
I guess a relevant
Does the Windows version have its own Hebrew support or does it use
Windows Hebrew support?
Delphi starting from 5 has it's own bidi algorithms. It does rely on Windows
hebrew but with a little tweaking it can do without.
Oleg.
can remember, QText for dos was written in Pascal, and the
Windows version was written with Delphi. This should make it rather easy
to port by using Kylix, since I don't think they used too many non-Kylix
wrapped API calls in there, and even if they did use a few, it shouldn't
be a problem
Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
About portability: The demo (you can (could?) download from www.qtext.com)
works quite well with recent versions of wine. This might (or might not,
I am not an expert) mean porting to libwine might be much easier, even
though less portable (e.g. to other Unices), than
On Tue, 2002-09-24 at 14:08, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
As for it working with Wine - does the BiDi also work? If so, it more or
less automatically means that there is no reliance on Windows BiDi.
Qtext does not rely on Widnosw idi support - Qtext works in Hebrew even
on non Bidi versions
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Oleg wrote:
Does the Windows version have its own Hebrew support or does it use
Windows Hebrew support?
Delphi starting from 5 has it's own bidi algorithms. It does rely on Windows
hebrew but with a little tweaking it can do without.
QText uses its own bidi
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
About portability: The demo (you can (could?) download from www.qtext.com)
works quite well with recent versions of wine.
Not here. qtext has problems with fonts. I kept getting error messages
about problems accessing (or opening, I'm not sure
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:08:08PM +0300, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
About portability: The demo (you can (could?) download from www.qtext.com)
works quite well with recent versions of wine. This might (or might not,
I am not an expert) mean porting to libwine
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:40:01PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Yedidyah Bar-David wrote:
About portability: The demo (you can (could?) download from www.qtext.com)
works quite well with recent versions of wine.
Not here. qtext has problems with fonts. I kept
34 matches
Mail list logo
