On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:06:02 -0500, Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov> wrote: I just don't think writing translation tables should be > expected of the average customer for something as mainstream as HTML! > >> and as you say, XSLT will take any XML through to Duxbury styles, >> using the SGML import feature, >> so XML is probably less of a problem than weak html. > > Have either of you tried feeding Duxbury non-trivial but well formed > HTML (or XHTML)? Data tables cells are all run together. Ordered lists > get a similar treatment (but UL is processed correctly). Strong and EM > are ignored while B is handled. I don't have a comprehensive list > because it makes me irrational. The recommend work-around is to open > the HTML document in Word, save as a .doc file, and import that into > DBT. Frightenly enough, this works reasonably well! How do the open > standards advocates feel about that? Fine. Although I am surprised that people have gone to the effort of translating the proprietary Word format, if it is really not possible to print a text dump from Links or W3M (since Lynx still handles tables badly, which is one of you apparent requirements). What is the process for sharing a translation rules that some clever expert wrote? Do you buy it from Duxbury, or can you just pass them around? cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile - Vice Presidente - Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org http://www.sidar.org (chaals is available for consulting at the moment)Received on Friday, 25 February 2005 15:58:21 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:49:46 GMT