stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com> writes: > I am preparing a LyX document with all the features listed in our GSOC > 2014 page. I will transfer it to ODF with tex4ht, possibly fix it > manually, and then will circulate it on list for ODF/Docx tests.
I think this is a brilliant idea - ths could then become the benchmark for the complete round-trip. > > Here is what I am including: > > sections, headers, ... > lists > emphasis, bold, ... > comments > track changes > tables and figures > footnotes > bibliographic references > math > cross-references > tracked changes > > It will have one section per item, do we can focus the tests on one > feature at a time, and perhaps split the document in mini-docs an have > a series of unit tests of sorts. > > > Question: > > 1. Is the list comprehensive enough? Too comprehensive? We should possibly prioritize some aspects which are more essential then others. There will very likely be some different views on e.g. math and footnotes, but I assume that there are some we can agree on. My list would be, in descending order of importance: 1) sections, headers, ... 2) lists 3) emphasis, bold, ... 4) comments 5) track changes 6) tables and figures 7) bibliographic references 8) tables 9) figures 10) math, footnotes & cross-references > > 2. For the Math: anyone having favorite equations / math constructs > that represent a sort of "baseline" case that would be desired and > other cases that would be the "optimum". I am thinking of the > complicated things I sometimes here you guys discussing on the list > and which I never use Not from my side - sorry. I prefer simple maths. Looking forward to the document, Rainer > > > S. > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Richard Heck <rgh...@lyx.org> wrote: >> It looks to me as if ODT <--> docx is OK via Libre Office. And if it's >> editors of journals, etc, then one way is good enough, no? >> >> R >> >> On Feb 25, 2014 4:15 AM, "Rainer M Krug" <rai...@krugs.de> wrote: >>> >>> Wilfried <wh...@gmx.de> writes: >>> >>> > Rainer M Krug wrote: >>> > >>> >> Wilfried <wh...@gmx.de> writes: >>> >> >>> >> > stefano franchi wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Rainer M Krug <rai...@krugs.de> >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > stefano franchi <stefano.fran...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> 2. Whether to target Microsoft's Word XML format or the Open >>> >> >> >> Document >>> >> >> >> Format (similarly XML-based) >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I would strongly argue for the Microsoft Word XML, as each >>> >> >> > conversion >>> >> >> > creates problems and inconsistencies. This said, if the conversion >>> >> >> > from >>> >> >> > MS Word XML to ODF and back can be done without causing problems >>> >> >> > in the >>> >> >> > roundtrip (i.e. the round-trip would then be lyx - ODF XML - MS >>> >> >> > XML - >>> >> >> > ODF XML - lyx)I would argue for the more "open" format which can >>> >> >> > be used >>> >> >> > on more Operating systems. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I have been told that, in its most recent versions, Microsoft Word >>> >> >> can >>> >> >> read ODF version >= 1.2 directly. That is, it can open, >>> >> >> edit, and save files in OpenOffice's native format. I have no means >>> >> >> of >>> >> >> checking this assertion, as I have no access to MS Word. >>> >> >> Could anyone with such access give it a try? >>> >> > >>> >> > In principle, this is true. >>> >> > However OO (I tested with Apache OO 4.01) cannot save in the latest >>> >> > Word >>> >> > format (.docx), and saveing as MS .xml results in complete loss of >>> >> > the >>> >> > equations. >>> >> >>> >> This is not true for Libre Office (4.1.2.3) on ac - I just tried, and a >>> >> small formula in LibreOffice, saved as .odt, then saved as .docx >>> >> (Microsoft Office 2007/2010 XML) resulted in a docx which could be >>> >> opened in Word 2011 and the equation was there. I=t could be edited >>> >> and, >>> >> when re-opened in LibreOffice, the edits were there. >>> >> >>> >> > Round trip is best if saving to Word 97/2000/2003 .doc >>> >> > format. >>> >> >>> >> As far as I know, doc is a non documented binary format - so I would >>> >> definitely not go there. >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > Word supports 3 ways to write equations: >>> >> > The oldest one is the EQ field function, which is easy to convert but >>> >> > rarely used in practice. >>> >> > The next is using the Equation Editor (standard for up to Word 2000) >>> >> > or >>> >> > its mature brother MathType which both create MTEF objects. >>> >> > The latest are Word 2007 and up equations (with a different object >>> >> > type >>> >> > OMML). >>> >> > And OpenOffice has its own equation editor which creates another >>> >> > object >>> >> > type, which cannot be converted to any of Word's equation types, at >>> >> > least not by Word nor by MathType (up to 6.7.a - current version is >>> >> > 6.9). However, Mathtype can convert to and from MathML and LaTeX. >>> >> > The newer Word equation object can only be converted to the older >>> >> > object >>> >> > type by MathType (AFAIK). >>> >> >>> >> I can not comment on this. >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > An OO document, containing an equation created in OO, saved as MS >>> >> > .doc >>> >> > (Word 97/2000/2003) and opened in Word 2010 contains the equation but >>> >> > this equation is not editable in Word - for editing this equation one >>> >> > needs OpenOffice installed. At least after the round trip OO -> .doc >>> >> > -> >>> >> > Word -> .doc -> OO the equation is still editable in OO. >>> >> > And an equation created in Word is not editable in OO. Even worse, if >>> >> > one uses the newer (Word 2007 and up) equation format (which is >>> >> > default >>> >> > if one uses the .docx format), then saves as .doc, the newer >>> >> > equations >>> >> > are irreversibly converted to pictures. >>> >> > >>> >> > Hope that makes the problems more clear. >>> >> >>> >> As I stated above, I could create a document =in Libre office, >>> >> including >>> >> equation, save it as docx, open it in Word 2011, edit the formula, save >>> >> it, open the document in LibreOffice, edits were there, and I could >>> >> continue editing there. May be differences between OpenOffice and >>> >> LibreOffice? >>> > >>> > I compared LibreOffice and OpenOffice: >>> > >>> > Save as .doc yes yes >>> > Equation saved as MTEF, editable OOmath, not editable >>> > Roundtrip no, stays MTEF remains OOMath >>> > MTEF remains MTEF >>> > >>> > Save as .docx yes no >>> > Equation saved as OMML, editable >>> > Roundtrip yes, back to OOMath >>> > MTEF remains MTEF >>> > >>> > >>> > Abbreviations: >>> > OOMath = OpenOffice or LibreOffice Equation >>> > MTEF = Microsoft Equation Editor (up to Word 2003) or MathType >>> > OMML = Microsoft Equation (Word 2007 and up) >>> > >>> > So, roundtrip is best with >>> > LibreOffice saving as .docx and opening from .docx >>> >>> Unless we want to stay open, and use odt format, which then can be >>> converted to docx using LibreOffice, but as Stefano pointed out, the >>> users "on the other side" will most likely be using MS Word, which is >>> particularly true for editors of Journals. So unless the conversion odt >>> <-> can be done in the background and it is lossless, I would go with >>> docx as the target format. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Rainer >>> >>> -- >>> Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation >>> Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) >>> >>> Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology >>> Stellenbosch University >>> South Africa >>> >>> Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 >>> Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 >>> Fax : +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 >>> >>> Fax (D): +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 >>> >>> email: rai...@krugs.de >>> >>> Skype: RMkrug -- Rainer M. Krug email: RMKrug<at>gmail<dot>com
pgplOLCD0cv3b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
