[liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: UTDML and where brl noes can appear
- From: Keith Creasy <kcreasy@xxxxxxx>
- To: "liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 22:33:07 +0000
It is likely that should View Plus not share work on supporting Word files
we'll see that someone does. It would be a shame to do the work twice but if it
is important to many more people than View Plus customers then we'll do it
anyway.
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Vic Beckley
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 4:01 PM
To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: UTDML and where brl noes can appear
Michael,
Thanks for the info. I will just keep my ears peeled!
Best regards from Ohio,
Vic
-----Original Message-----
From: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Whapples
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 3:37 PM
To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: UTDML and where brl noes can appear
It is being done for ViewPlus, however if it leads to improvements in semantic
action files I do not know whether those will be given back to the community.
In short it is not my decision, but I would hope the semantic action files
could be given back.
However, it looks like we might need to do some cleaning up of the word XML.
There are cases where one can delete characters and retype them (IE. in Word
itself the document looks the same as it started) but when one refers to the
actual XML Word breaks these into multiple w:t elements and so could lead to
liblouisutdml not translating properly.
Such a cleanup tool might need some work and so I might be less expectant for
that to be given back to the community, however again it is not my decision.
Hope that at least gives you an idea of the state of XML word can give you.
We are not even sure whether in ViewPlus for the project which might use Word
XML whether we will even continue with that format as Word is so bad at
producing the XML in a useful form.
Michael Whapples
On 18/10/2013 18:38, Vic Beckley wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Is this work you are doing with Word files for ViewPlus or for BB? I
> am extremely interested in more direct access to Word files, even if
> that
means
> saving them in XML format. At least that would bypass the DAISY plug-in.
If
> you can't talk about it, I know how that goes. Thanks for any info.
>
>
> Best regards from Ohio,
>
> Vic
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:liblouis-liblouisxml-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Michael Whapples
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 12:38 PM
> To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: UTDML and where brl noes can
> appear
>
> So from what you are saying are the files wordDocument.sem and
> w_wordDocument.sem no longer needed? If so why have they not been
> deleted from the project?
>
> I must stress though, this is not docx, it is Word XML, like if you
> select the format Word XML 2003 in the save dialog of word (it is a
> single XML not an archive containing multiple files). Will docx.sem
> work on this?
>
> Will I need to create a config file to ensure docx.sem is used?
>
> Michael Whapples
> On 18/10/2013 17:25, John J. Boyer wrote:
>> Separate semantic-action files are not needed for documents that use
>> namespaces. Semantic-action files use only the local names. Given the
>> possibility of name conflicts, maybe this should be changed.
>>
>> Both of the old MSWord semantic-action files are wrong. Look at
>> docx.sem in the lbu_files directory of liblouisutdmll. You can
>> correct or delete the old files.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 04:37:35PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
>>> If that is so then the Word XML semantic action files (I believe
>>> both wordDocument.sem and w_wordDocument.sem are wrong as they
>>> assign document action to wordDocument and w:wordDocument elements.
>>>
>>> PS. Why do we need separate semantic action files for when a
>>> namespace is used or not? Also relying on the XML to alias the namespace as
>>> w:
>>> seems to be wrong as potentially one can alias it as they like: eg.
>>> xmlns:w="..." or xmlns:word="...", both would be correct XML and
>>> mean the same.
>>>
>>> Michael Whapples
>>> On 18/10/2013 02:16, John J. Boyer wrote:
>>>> In dtbook.sem ad nimas.sem the action document is given to <book>
>>>> because it contains the actual docummennt. <dtbook> contains the
>>>> head node as well. So for the xml part of docx <body> must be given
>>>> the action document. The root element <document> gets no action.
>>>> That is
the
>>>> way things are set up.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 09:09:52PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
>>>>> No the document node should be w:wordDocument.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like w:body is given the action no.
>>>>>
>>>>> In Word XML w:body is like body in HTML, where the body of the
document
>>>>> will be found, so why should brl nodes appear outside that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also I notice two .sem files for Word documents, looks like one is
>>>>> for when there is a XML namespace in the Word XML and the other is
>>>>> for
> where
>>>>> there is not. There seems to be differences between these (eg.
>>>>> w:wordDocument has action no where as wordDocument has action
> document).
>>>>> Michael Whapples
>>>>> On 17/10/2013 18:09, John J. Boyer wrote:
>>>>>> What semantic action is asigned to the w:body node? It should be
>>>>>> document. Lok at the docx.sem file in lbu_files .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 05:46:50PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
>>>>>>> Where can the brl nodes appear in a UTDML document?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have a Word XML file which has been marked with UTDML and the
last
>>>>>>> brl node for the last page number appears outside the document
>>>>>>> body
>>>>>>> (w:body) element. This looks strange and means that one has to
>>>>>>> get
> the
>>>>>>> parser to look outside the body of the document to get all
>>>>>>> Braille, which is certainly sub-optimal as one will need to
>>>>>>> filter out much unwanted stuff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is LibLouisUTDML working correctly in placing this brl node
>>>>>>> outside
> the
>>>>>>> body element?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Whapples
>>>>>>> For a description of the software, to download it and links to
>>>>>>> project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>>>>> For a description of the software, to download it and links to
>>>>> project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>>> For a description of the software, to download it and links to
>>> project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> For a description of the software, to download it and links to project
> pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
>
> For a description of the software, to download it and links to project
> pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
For a description of the software, to download it and links to project pages go
to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
For a description of the software, to download it and links to project pages go
to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
For a description of the software, to download it and links to
project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Other related posts:
