>Hi Alex, > >>I would like to second Craig's position on Unicode vs markup. I've >>run into an >>issue with a multitude of special hyphens and spaces defined in the Unicode >>standard already while working on the new file format. I will defend to the >>last breath the current consensus position that it is more efficient to use >>Unicode instead of inventing elements for all the special formatting cases or >>reusing those from other markup systems. OOWriter importer is the >>tool for the >>job here. >> >>Alex > >I don't think Unicode and markup are mutually exclusive. Working >with Unicode lets you define markup sets for any given purpose as >soon as character styles are available. > >IMHO, it is quite reasonable to let markup sets be defined by the >publisher and instruct the authors on their use. For instance, an >English native speaker will easily understand <em></em> tags as >"emphasise", but for a German native speaker <bet></bet> would be >more intuitive. As Craig pointed out, all it takes is a working Get >Text plugin. This would provide users all over the world with a >maximum of flexibility.
OK. With such a small set of markup, I think we could work this out in situations where we can directly talk to the writer (which is not always the case). I see that possible for a specific project. The difficulty will be to get a majority of people on that track! Do you know if there is a way to automatically convert italic and bold to this kind of markup so they'd be useful in such a workflow? Louis >Another advantage is that you don't have to run different file >formats through OOo (including all uncertainties) before using them >in scribus. > >Christoph >_______________________________________________ >Scribus mailing list >Scribus at nashi.altmuehlnet.de >http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/mailman/listinfo/scribus
