[odf-discuss] A Pit Bull in the Mix

[Damon Anderson]

Daniel,

very nice simplification. Now that I can use. DocBook also too complicated  
a spec to readily implement. Just trying to get through the DTD chapters  
that start out the spec is like pulling teeth.

So, how would you implement sections in your 30 second tutorial?

-Damon

On Wed, 30 May 2007 01:09:40 +0700, Daniel <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:

> Damon Anderson wrote:
>> Now here's the irony. ODF... not going to happen either. Also still too  
>> complicated. The only way I'm going to implement ODF is if I can get it  
>> simplified down to a maximum of 10 pages that is pure and simple step  
>> by step implementation instructions.
>
> Do you just want to produce documents or do you want to read too? If you  
> just want to produce documents and you want something simpler than ODF,  
> I recommend that you use DocBook and then use the docbook2odf converter  
> from Comsultia.
>
> Alternatively we could put together a short 3-5 page tutorial to get  
> developers who already know HTML writing very simple ODF files, if all  
> you want is headings, paragraphs and lists.
>
> Here is one short tutorial:
> -----// Daniel's "Learn ODF in 30 seconds" tutorial //--------
> 1. Using OpenOffice, create a blank document. This is your template. You  
> can use the Stylist to modify the style of headings, paragraphs, etc.  
> Save it as "template.odt".
>
> 2. Unzip the file in a separate directory. One of the files created is  
> content.xml
>
> 3. In a new text file, write your document as if it were HTML, using the  
> following conversion table 1 at the end of this tutorial.
>
> 4. Put your document inside the <office:text> tags in content.xml
>
> 5. Zip the file again and voila! You've made your very own ODF file.
>
> TABLE 1: ODF for HTML coders.
>    Paragraphs:
>      <p> ... </p>
>      Becomes...
>      <text:p> ... </text:p>
>
>    Headings:
>      <h1> ... </h1>
>      Becomes...
>      <text:h text:style-name="Heading_20_1"> ... </text:h>
>
>      Same for h2, h3, ...
>
>    Lists:
>      <ul> ... </ul>
>      Becomes...
>      <text:list text:style-name="L1"> ... </text:list>
>
>      <ol> ... </ol>
>      Becomes...
>      <text:list text:style-name="L2"> ... </text:list>
>
>      <li> ... </li>
>      Becomes...
>      <text:list-item> <text:p> ... </text:p> </text:list-item>
>
>    Tables:
>      <table> ... </table>
>      Becomes...
>      <table:table> ... </table:table>
>
>      <tr> ... </tr>
>      Becomes...
>      <table:table-row> ... </table:table-row>
>
>      <td> ... </td>
>      Becomes...
>      <table:table-cell> <text:p> ... </text:p> </table:table-cell>
> -----// END Tutorial //--------
>
>> Hmm... Why bother with ODF when I can simple XHTML and CSS and get 99%  
>> of all the functionality I need?
>
> Indeed. If HTML meets your needs, go for it. It's simpler and better  
> supported. But also consider DocBook, or something like the tutorial  
> above. I certainly don't recommend doing anything more complex than you  
> need.
>
>> You see I think ODF is the right answer for the wrong question. ODF is  
>> a common office format, which is great. Woo hoo. What we programmers  
>> are looking for, though, is a common format that is simple and easy to  
>> implement that GOES TO all other formats.
>
> I am a programmer. I consider ODF fairly easy to implement, especially  
> if you consider what it accomplishes. ODF also lends itself to being  
> transformed. For example, the ODF viewer works by converting ODF to HTML  
> and giving the result to an off-the-shelf HTML engine.
>
>> This is why I say all hail XHTML CSS (and maybe a little XSLFO thrown  
>> in). If only Silk was easier to implement. sigh... more comlicated  
>> documentation.
>
> Good luck with XSLFO.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss