Jump to content
Linda Reinfeld

Wishlist: Report capability for Open Office formats

Recommended Posts

I now use Open Office exclusively, and I would like that to be a report option for reporting in TMG. I can use a work-around now, but it would be nice to have the direct reporting capability.

 

Linda Reinfeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would like to see TMG add support for Open Office, and XML type output in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gidday

 

If I might add a "me too" response.

 

I also understand that the ISO has just endorsed the format used by OpenOffice as a word processing standard, and the National Archives of Australia also endorses true XML as a file format.

 

Seems an obvious move in terms of genealogy.

 

Regards from a wintery-looking Canberra.

 

Shane Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I now use Open Office exclusively, and I would like that to be a report option for reporting in TMG. I can use a work-around now, but it would be nice to have the direct reporting capability.

 

Linda Reinfeld

 

I agree. However, there's a semi-workaround. If you generate a report in *.doc format Open Office (OO) Write will open it. However, there's one glitch in that.

 

When opened in OO, all images appear squeezed into boxes which print as 1.5 inch squares. While it's possible to restore them to original size (right-click, choose "picture", "type" tab, "Original size") when there are a great many images it becomes fairly painful. Adding that to the change to wrapping so that they can be relocated and moving the caption from nearby text to more directly associate it with the graphic (so it goes along with the move), both of which also apply to using MSWord, and one has a good deal of post-report activity to do.

 

The squeezing problem has been reported to the OO people and to Wholly Genes. The OO people responded that they recognize it as a bug, so presumably in some future release it will be fixed. Since it seems to only be associated with TMG outputs it likely will be at a low priority, however. Wholly Genes, understandably, is likely to take a similar approach since it seems to only be associated with OO Write.

 

An advantage to using OO Write is that it can handle more endnotes than MSWord's versions before that in Office 2003 (the problem seems to have been fixed for that version).

 

Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are also some TMG paragraph style errors in the RTF conversion of certain footnoting that display as apparent font errors in OpenOffice.org Writer.

 

However it seems that the "legacy" RTF output from TMG has been deliberately formatted in this way to be compatible with MSWord. This same type of style error in Ooo Writer, due to "legacy" RTF formatting, may also occur with UFT 3.1.

John M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Me Too.

Am a recent convert to OO & haven't done much work with TMG Journal Reports output to OO but one thing I do notice is that the citation reference numbers in the text are absolutely tiny. I have exponents set to 11pt but they seem to be coming out at about 4pt!

 

Chris Sackett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just a bit concerned that WG will add an extra layer here, more complexity, greater maintenance costs etc.

 

Surely the whole point of RTF format is that any serious word processor should be able to cope with it. If the TMG RTF format has been "tweaked" for MS Word, then I would agree that WG should consider a "standard" RTF format that can be read by any serious word processor.

 

The reason I output in RTF is in the hope that if I send that report to anyone else, they will be able to read it. I am now worried that the TMG RTF format might not be that transportable. I feel another set of empirical tests coming on!

 

I suppose it is possible with many "old" standards that they get different flavours (UNIX is just 1 example).

 

Does anyone know of any good articles on RTF standards and who does/not abide by them (sounds like MS does not?). Does WG have an official comment on their RTF standard.

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that word processor output comes from a 3rd party library over which Wholly Genes has no control. When the library supports OpenOffice, TMG will likely support it as soon as that or a subsequent version of the library is adopted for use with TMG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep in mind that word processor output comes from a 3rd party library over which Wholly Genes has no control. When the library supports OpenOffice, TMG will likely support it as soon as that or a subsequent version of the library is adopted for use with TMG.

 

I didn't receive a reply to my report about the OO incompatability to Wholly genes, but I assume (hope) that the report was forwarded to the "third party."

 

Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely the whole point of RTF format is that any serious word processor should be able to cope with it. If the TMG RTF format has been "tweaked" for MS Word, then I would agree that WG should consider a "standard" RTF format that can be read by any serious word processor. . . . .

 

Does anyone know of any good articles on RTF standards and who does/not abide by them (sounds like MS does not?). Does WG have an official comment on their RTF standard.

Pete

"Ask not whether TMG has been tweaked for MSWord, ask whether MSWord has been tweaked for TMG." **

 

The OpenOffice.org suite may export files more compatible with the (current) RTF spec than MS Office itself. However, Microsoft's products have an advantage in being able to recognize and filter "legacy" RTF files, whether or not correctly implemented at any point in time. So TMG/Ooo users should export in (converted) MS *.doc format for the foreseeable future and let it go at that.

 

One talking point of the [sun] Open Document format, is to take [MS] proprietary file structures out of the equation. . . .but that does not necessarily mean that files saved in any easily readable open XML format will necessarily be more correctly implemented than easily readable files saved in proprietary [MS] RTF format.

 

**State of Massachusetts vs. . . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had not heard of OpenOffice until I read this topic, (I lead a shelterd life and promise to get out more :) ). Having trialed it for a week or so I am a convert and as such would like to add my "Me Too".

David

Edited by Bearnie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am slowly migrating from MS to the OO world. Also migrating to Red Hat's Fedora Core 5 OS. Looking good, but will do whatever I need to do to continue using TMG.

 

Thanks TMG for your good support

 

Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add me to this list of persons who wish TMG would support Open Office.org. TMG prides itself on being able to export to over 60 different word processors in their native format. There shouldn't have to be a work around. It should simply be added to the supported word processors, and considering it's open source, it shouldn't be difficult. OpenOffice.org Writer should be supported. Open Office.org is a popular office suit and becoming more popular daily. I no longer use, or have, MS Word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×