emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Emacs as a word processor (ways to convert Word/RTF proprietary file


From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Emacs as a word processor (ways to convert Word/RTF proprietary files)
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 14:08:13 +0200

> Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:58:23 +0300
> From: Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>
> 
> > I think you underestimate the amount of pressure applied on any
> > J.R. Hacker having a daytime job to use MS Office.  You cannot be a
> > useful and appreciated part of an organization without having to use
> > those tools, because all the correspondence and all the
> > documentation is based on that.  And there's no real Free Software
> > alternative, certainly not based on Emacs.
> 
> Since 21 years I use free software. Before that I used proprietary
> Windows and various programs. Already back then I have found all the
> free software to replace anything that I otherwise used on Windows. I
> remember using LyX and writing books and HTML pages with it. That is
> why I cannot share that opinion. I did find what I needed many years
> ago, individually, so other users can also find it.

We cannot tell our users to wait for another 21 years for a solution
that might emerge if they invest enough energy in their own private
collection of tools.

And your solutions are lacking, even by your own account.  You have
just complained elsewhere that using ps-print (which you say is the
solution for the "printing" part of WP) doesn't allow you to control
the place where each line is wrapped.  In addition, ps-print's support
for non-Latin-1 scripts is extremely poor (needs a lot of configuring
and looks ugly on paper).  And I don't even want to start talking
about R2L scripts.

So what you have, and claim is a satisfactory solution for the issue
at hand, is actually not a solution at all.  It may be good enough for
your personal needs (and even there you are not always satisfied), but
it definitely is not good enough for others, not unless they are in
cultures that are English-speaking or in some parts of Western Europe.

That is nowhere near the goal we want Emacs to be.

> Among priorities to have word processing or to have import/export with
> Word format, than first would first to have word processing that users
> may construct their pages in WYSIWYG fashion, and print it and get
> nice results. As you mentioned enriched mode, and I am using it for
> notes in the database, that could be good start (without knowing
> technical background).

Priorities are a separate issue.  I agree that we should have WYSIWYG
editing capabilities before we have interoperability with other
formats.  I was responding to the claim that interoperability with MS
Office is not needed, or that it's so bad we shouldn't even consider
it.

> Menu -> File -> Import -> Word Document, open up document in Dired and
> run function with Abiword to convert it to format that Emacs will
> understand.
> 
> Menu -> File -> Export -> Word Document, run function with Abiword to
> convert the file Emacs is editing to be exported as Word document.

That is already an unnecessary nuisance.  Users should be able to
visit such files as usual, with "C-x C-f" etc., and save them with the
likes of "C-x C-s".  Emacs has infrastructure for converting the file
under the hood for many years, see the node "Format Conversion" in the
ELisp manual.

And anyway, the conversion itself is not the issue.  The issue is how
to let our users edit the output of the conversion conveniently and
easily.  Currently, Emacs doesn't provide such facilities for any
format that Abiword can produce.  Someone has to code such facilities,
and that isn't get done by talking.

> > You further ask them to be able to create for themselves a bunch of
> > scripts or programs to convert the Office files to something else,
> > edit it in Emacs, then convert back without losing important
> > features of the original document.
> 
> As the main target is GNU/Linux we need not ask people to keep any
> compatibility with Word. Providing conversion functions as explained
> above is enough.

I think there's a misunderstanding wrt the meaning of "compatibility"
in this context.  From where I stand, it is immaterial whether we
convert the files under the hood or read them directly.  users will
not mind either way.  IOW, this is a non-issue.

> Every user in Emacs and on mailing list is asked to create bunch of
> scripts and programs to convert this and that, do this and that, just
> look any mailing list and observe.

That is definitely false.  Emacs can be used as a useful and powerful
editor without any tinkering or scripting.

> > I don't think I see the logic in that.  If you are opposed to using
> > MS Office file formats, you should refuse to look at them, in any
> > form or shape, and instead request that the person who sends them
> > produces them in some free format instead.  That would be a logical
> > position which I can understand and respect.
> 
> I do refuse and never open such files. I send to people instructions
> how to convert them and will not read it until they do, and they
> do. 

That's good for you, but asking others to behave like that is
impractical, let alone unnecessary.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]