Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-17 Thread Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen
> As stated previously: > What's about rtf ? > - Can be read by ( almost ?) any WordProcessor. > - Can be produced via sgml ( sgml2rtf ). RTF format is a mirror of the Word document model. So it's basically the ordinary Word format in another wrapping. So the problems of mapping between Word docu

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-17 Thread Jochen Kuepper
On Fre, 15 Jan 1999 Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: >The easy solution is to use HTML export, which the newer Word >versions read rather well. Maybe we should develop a native HTML >export with style sheet (CSS) support at some point in time? As stated previously: What's about rtf ? - Can be re

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-15 Thread Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen
> The problem is that the .doc format is: > - not really documented (I think) It is well documented on the MSDN which everybody can access. > - contains OLE streams which are similar to a complete file system to > implement, AFAIK For writing, this is not too bad, if you can accept a few limi

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-15 Thread M . Clemence
I am new to the list, but this message is so relevant to me at the moment. Could I suggest that instead of trying to produce .doc files, rtf might be a better "exchange" format. Or indeed what is the status of the SGML tools link (the new tools don't fit well with lyx as it stands, you have to g

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-15 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "David" == David C Brown N2RJT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: David> On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote: >> I've found that a conference I'm submitting papers to requires that >> "Attachments should be in MS Word 7.0 or WordPerfect 8.0 or lower >> version." David> Not a soluti

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-15 Thread Garst R. Reese
John Weiss wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 02:15:03PM -0500, Larry S. Marso wrote: > > Ask them to accept a postscript version. You can easily print *.ps files > > to most network printers in office/educational environments these days. > > Better yet: get ghostscript v5.*; it has conversion

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-15 Thread John Weiss
On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 02:15:03PM -0500, Larry S. Marso wrote: > Ask them to accept a postscript version. You can easily print *.ps files > to most network printers in office/educational environments these days. Better yet: get ghostscript v5.*; it has conversion to *.pdf format, which most pl

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-14 Thread David C. Brown N2RJT
On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote: > I've found that a conference I'm submitting papers to requires that > "Attachments should be in MS Word 7.0 or WordPerfect 8.0 or lower > version." Not a solution for you here and now, but this need does bring up a possible future feature..

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-14 Thread Larry S. Marso
Ask them to accept a postscript version. You can easily print *.ps files to most network printers in office/educational environments these days. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 11:01:16AM -0600, Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote: > > I've found that a co

Re: for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-14 Thread Amir Karger
On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 11:01:16AM -0600, Richard E. Hawkins Esq. wrote: > > I've found that a conference I'm submitting papers to requires that > "Attachments should be in MS Word 7.0 or WordPerfect 8.0 or lower > version." > > I suppose the text can convert though latex2html or some such, bu

for crying out loud . . .

1999-01-14 Thread Richard E. Hawkins Esq.
I've found that a conference I'm submitting papers to requires that "Attachments should be in MS Word 7.0 or WordPerfect 8.0 or lower version." I suppose the text can convert though latex2html or some such, but what about my equations? There's no way in hell that i'm going to mess with equa