From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.text.pandoc/12114 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matthew Pickering Newsgroups: gmane.text.pandoc Subject: Re: Reference.docx and default Word styles Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:36:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <10d80cbd-5bdb-4937-811c-24af52aaadf3@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_367_331349248.1424774205383" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1424774213 17793 80.91.229.3 (24 Feb 2015 10:36:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:36:53 +0000 (UTC) To: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Original-X-From: pandoc-discuss+bncBCO2LGEC4AIBBPNIWGTQKGQE2UGYEHI-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Tue Feb 24 11:36:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qg0-f55.google.com ([209.85.192.55]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YQCr8-00035L-Tk for gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:36:47 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-qg0-f55.google.com with SMTP id q107sf9292805qgd.0 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:36:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=V9iFW+SkEX75k0r7w6LZpFtrJW6JE058AdzwVSzBapg=; b=Mo4hxGXZr+mzCXWfAu3GEd78Nf3UxAN8w2HLl3aYhvX9o2+WJofTvuzQaxOPRrrF0W s3zVU5CGRc7t2CvXEQvaxJk6FGd6rTBKVwjFgLgMT6MnzbcTNhowAWv98CIXloo4pUC7 G3KzyYGOxsk/418E1v/b6AE0uE8fsoQ6CdCNdJS7J/0Nl5/DkxLK65C5nzpo75zizahr 8hRe3Oup0QUn51yGtH51TpuXUaj9Cw0c/0c2FXaF+gN99ircaCMOG1nJabA8Tzv62nwm 5SaF4Ib/EYSRDmUGToQdKtFfK5hqgrrCiPzlYwS2PFsnfkmWpRQ2/yfxqISW7TYbwPbo Ncmg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=V9iFW+SkEX75k0r7w6LZpFtrJW6JE058AdzwVSzBapg=; b=pMWK9sOG/iXGUTrTE/9KZDmr4e7e8R9TPRJy8kn0/J/rmbl8nq0nfK16mVDjxTgbal WHUjimaZj+0a5Hh8gfwOZ41s/m4zPK/EOySfJBLQcR7riiifWMJSUr4w5b1hfUMIwmPM 2iXceo4H6x/R6qFsyQVobIq1+YCIR/tkbQztUo+cALE4jqSd3/ID8PyrGorlBGjJ5m+I DbC+QEnTXKi1RSXB0Cb7YM5oiaxxb9sAv16Nf0zPpIMk10Hf/cZNQc8SndJUnCftOTZB T0NrDuiWDk99Z7HsylUkV6uKTBiwNRbViAKYaY91nioZIB2JO1QzmjEd/vT6h5sxgWjw i6/A== X-Received: by 10.140.100.230 with SMTP id s93mr167632qge.1.1424774206158; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:36:46 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Original-Received: by 10.140.42.229 with SMTP id c92ls2803416qga.98.gmail; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:36:45 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.102.195 with SMTP id w61mr168200qge.40.1424774205778; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:36:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <10d80cbd-5bdb-4937-811c-24af52aaadf3-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org> X-Original-Sender: matthewtpickering-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org; contact pandoc-discuss+owners-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1007024079513 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.text.pandoc:12114 Archived-At: ------=_Part_367_331349248.1424774205383 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_368_561714465.1424774205383" ------=_Part_368_561714465.1424774205383 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Ok -- to clarify you are talking about modifying the docx writer to produce an output which word better understands? I don't think that there will be many who object to these changes as the reference.docx has been the issue of quite a few bug reports. It would be even better if that with these changes, it is possible for a user to use any file with these default styles defined for reasonable results. Which if I'm understanding correctly would be an unintended but nice consequence. So for the record, I think 2 is the best solution. On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 10:14:27 PM UTC, Nikolay Yakimov wrote: > > Hi. I'm working on https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/pull/1968, and I've got > some questions. > > Some styles in reference.docx are marked as custom, some are not. Some of > those not marked custom are recognized by Word as built-in. Some are not, > however. Word automatically marks those as custom, but this introduces > unnecessary ambiguity. Furthermore, some styles not recognized by Word as > built-in actually duplicate built-in styles, and could be renamed to > reflect that. > > Here is a list of styles I'm most concerned about: > Nameambiguoustypecan be replaced byAuthoryesp?Abstractyesp?Compactyesp?Image > Captionyespcaption?Block QuoteyespIntense Quote, Block Text, QuoteTable > Captionyespcaption?Definition Termyesp?Definitionyesp?FirstParagraphyesp? > LinknocHyperlinkFootnote Refnocfootnote reference > > these are either ambiguous (again, meaning that they are neither custom, > nor Word defaults), duplicate default Word styles, or both. > > So the question is, what should be done with them? I've got the following > options: > > 1. Update reference.docx to define ambiguous styles as custom. Do > nothing more. This is a quick-and-dirty solution. > 2. Replace styles in reference with word-recognized ones as best I > can, set those I can't as custom. This is a longer path, but leading to > hopefully better user experience. > 3. Do nothing at all, and hope for the best. This will likely lead to > 'surprises' in the future, and not the pleasant kind, I fear. > > First two options require significant updates to reference.docx though, > and option 2 is not strictly backwards-compatible with pandoc-created docx > (although it'll likely be a couple of styles, not much more). > > > So, what are your thoughts on this matter? > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/d71ce0fa-d002-474a-8e6e-b97500b27352%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ------=_Part_368_561714465.1424774205383 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ok -- to clarify you are talking about modifying the docx = writer to produce an output which word better understands? I don't think th= at there will be many who object to these changes as the reference.docx has= been the issue of quite a few bug reports. It would be even better if that= with these changes, it is possible for a user to use any file with these d= efault styles defined for reasonable results. Which if I'm understanding co= rrectly would be an unintended but nice consequence. 

So = for the record, I think 2 is the best solution.

On Monday, February = 23, 2015 at 10:14:27 PM UTC, Nikolay Yakimov wrote:

= Hi. I'm working on https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/pull/1968, and I've got some qu= estions.

Some styles in ref= erence.docx are marked as custom, some are not. Some of those not marked cu= stom are recognized by Word as built-in. Some are not, however. Word automa= tically marks those as custom, but this introduces unnecessary ambiguity. F= urthermore, some styles not recognized by Word as built-in actually duplica= te built-in styles, and could be renamed to reflect that.

=

Here is a list of styles I'm most concerned about:<= /span>

<= tr style=3D"border-top-width:1px;border-top-style:solid;border-top-color:rg= b(204,204,204)"><= td align=3D"center" style=3D"padding:6px 13px;border:1px solid rgb(221,221,= 221)">p<= tr style=3D"border-top-width:1px;border-top-style:solid;border-top-color:rg= b(204,204,204)">= footnote reference
Nameambiguoustypecan be replaced by
Authoryes?
Abstractyesp?
Compactyesp?
Image Captionyes= pcaption?
Block QuoteyespIntense Quote, Block= Text, Quote
Table Caption<= /td>yespcaption?
Definition Termyes= p?
D= efinitionyes= p?
FirstParagraphyesp?
Link= nocHyperlink
Footno= te Refnoc

t= hese are either ambiguous (again, meaning that they are neither custom, nor= Word defaults), duplicate default Word styles, or both.

= So the question is, what should= be done with them? I've got the following options:

  1. Update reference.docx to define ambi= guous styles as custom. Do nothing more. This is a quick-and-dirty solution= .
  2. Replace styles= in reference with word-recognized ones as best I can, set those I can't as= custom. This is a longer path, but leading to hopefully better user experi= ence.
  3. Do nothing= at all, and hope for the best. This will likely lead to 'surprises' in the= future, and not the pleasant kind, I fear.

First two options require sig= nificant updates to reference.docx though, and option 2 is not strictly bac= kwards-compatible with pandoc-created docx (although it'll likely be a coup= le of styles, not much more).


So, what are your thoughts on this matter?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to pand= oc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/= msgid/pandoc-discuss/d71ce0fa-d002-474a-8e6e-b97500b27352%40googlegroups.co= m.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_368_561714465.1424774205383-- ------=_Part_367_331349248.1424774205383--