Re: AbiWord is Great

From: Martin Sevior (msevior@tauon.ph.unimelb.EDU.AU)
Date: Sun Oct 20 2002 - 10:57:42 EDT

  • Next message: Alan Horkan: "Re: FAQ: Unanswered Question:"

    On 20 Oct 2002, David Chart wrote:

    > On Sun, 2002-10-20 at 15:17, Martin Sevior wrote:
    > >
    > > HI David,
    > > I think you have a pretty reasonable set of requirements for a
    > > professional writer. I think/hope that the feature set we'll provide for
    > > abiword 2.0 will get us a foot in the door for users in your catagory.
    > >
    >
    > I think so too. 1.0.x is already good enough for people writing for me.
    >
    > Specifics:
    >
    > > > There you go, easily quotable praise. Feel free to do so, as well. I'm
    > > > actually using CVS HEAD, and keeping all my files in a local CVS
    > > > repository just in case, and the automatic assert on opening a document
    > > > is irritating. I thought Martin was going to remove that?
    > >
    > > Sorry. Will do.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > >
    > > > 3) Handling of RTF from non-standard applications is still a bit
    > > > intolerant. I'm sure the RTF produced by Quark XPress is utterly
    > > > horrible, but Abi refuses to open it. Since I get sent RTF from lots of
    > > > different apps, I need something that will open everything.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Could you please open bugs in bugzilla and attach offending documents?
    > > I've found that we can get most docs to import reasonablally well with a
    > > only a few minor tweaks.
    > >
    >
    > Sorry, the documents are too confidential to post to bugzilla. I could
    > send a zipped set to individual developers who want to work on it,
    > though. (I'm the person who gets to decide who sees the documents.)
    >

    I'll keep them confidential if you'd like to send them to me. I've had a
    bit of practice now at working around rtf abiguities.

    > > > 3.5) Tables aren't quite good enough, but they're really close, so I'm
    > > > sure this will be fixed very soon. (Thanks Martin!)
    > > >
    > >
    > > Can you be a bit more specfic on what you need or is the current state of
    > > bugs in tables (which I'm working through) just too bad to make them worth
    > > while?
    > >
    >
    > Just the bugs. As far as I can see, all the features are there.
    > Actually, I have a document that doesn't import properly which I could
    > post to bugzilla, so I'll do that now.
    >

    It would help if you could create some reproducible bugs for tables. It
    helps to keep me focussed.

    Cheers

    Martin



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 20 2002 - 11:04:59 EDT