Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #4099 > unrolled thread

anyone know of RTF translator?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.php

Contents

  anyone know of RTF translator? Michael Joel <no@please.com> - 2011-12-19 19:06 -0500
    Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-12-19 20:05 -0500
      Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Derek Turner <frderek@cesmail.net> - 2011-12-20 13:07 +0000
        Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2011-12-20 09:19 -0600
        Re: anyone know of RTF translator? crankypuss <no@email.thanks> - 2011-12-22 03:16 -0700
      Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2011-12-20 21:15 +0000
        Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2011-12-20 17:14 -0500
        Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2011-12-20 16:16 -0600
          Re: anyone know of RTF translator? "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2011-12-21 08:59 -0600
            Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2011-12-21 10:36 -0600
            Re: anyone know of RTF translator? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-12-21 17:04 +0000
    Re: anyone know of RTF translator? Michael Joel <no@please.com> - 2011-12-20 12:40 -0500
      Re: anyone know of RTF translator? tony@mountifield.org (Tony Mountifield) - 2011-12-20 17:50 +0000

#4099 — anyone know of RTF translator?

I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
course free is preferred.

Thanks
Mike

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4100

On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
> course free is preferred.
>
> Thanks
> Mike

Open it in MS Word
Save it in HTML

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4106

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
>> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>> course free is preferred.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Mike
> 
> Open it in MS Word
> Save it in HTML

As free is preferred:

open it in Libre/OpenOffice
save it in HTML



-- 
"Capitalisation is the difference between helping 
your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4108

At 20 Dec 2011 13:07:01 GMT Derek Turner <frderek@cesmail.net> wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> 
> > On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
> >> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
> >> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
> >> course free is preferred.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Mike
> > 
> > Open it in MS Word
> > Save it in HTML
> 
> As free is preferred:
> 
> open it in Libre/OpenOffice
> save it in HTML
> 

Pure CLI (and free):

rtf2latex2e (http://sourceforge.net/projects/rtf2latex2e/)
tex4ht (http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~gurari/TeX4ht/)

> 
> 

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software        -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


                                          

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4127

On 12/20/2011 06:07 AM, Derek Turner wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
>>> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>>> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>>> course free is preferred.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mike
>>
>> Open it in MS Word
>> Save it in HTML
>
> As free is preferred:
>
> open it in Libre/OpenOffice
> save it in HTML

There is a free utility whose name I can't at the moment remember (I 
think it is "Calibre") whose purpose is to prepare "kindle-readable" 
<sic> documents from myriad formats.  Try google.  This url has some 
possibly relevant information:

http://wiki.mobileread.com/wiki/E-book_conversion

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4112

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
>> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>> course free is preferred.

> Open it in MS Word
> Save it in HTML

You owe me a keyboard cleaning Jerry. Honestly, have you seen the garbage 
that msword outputs when you ask it for html.

Open office might be better, I don't know. It generates this for a 
document containing a single word:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
	<META HTTP-EQUIV="CONTENT-TYPE" CONTENT="text/html; 
charset=utf-8">
	<TITLE></TITLE>
	<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="LibreOffice 3.3  (Unix)">
	<META NAME="AUTHOR" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
	<META NAME="CREATED" CONTENT="20111220;21113400">
	<META NAME="CHANGEDBY" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
	<META NAME="CHANGED" CONTENT="20111220;21122200">
	<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
	<!--
		@page { margin: 2cm }
		P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
		P.western { so-language: en-GB }
	-->
	</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY LANG="en-GB" DIR="LTR">
<P CLASS="western" STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Test</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>

which I think is a lot cleaner than word would produce for the same 
document.

Rgds

Denis McMahon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4113

On 12/20/2011 4:15 PM, Denis McMahon wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
>>> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>>> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>>> course free is preferred.
>
>> Open it in MS Word
>> Save it in HTML
>
> You owe me a keyboard cleaning Jerry. Honestly, have you seen the garbage
> that msword outputs when you ask it for html.
>
> Open office might be better, I don't know. It generates this for a
> document containing a single word:
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
> 	<META HTTP-EQUIV="CONTENT-TYPE" CONTENT="text/html;
> charset=utf-8">
> 	<TITLE></TITLE>
> 	<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="LibreOffice 3.3  (Unix)">
> 	<META NAME="AUTHOR" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
> 	<META NAME="CREATED" CONTENT="20111220;21113400">
> 	<META NAME="CHANGEDBY" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
> 	<META NAME="CHANGED" CONTENT="20111220;21122200">
> 	<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
> 	<!--
> 		@page { margin: 2cm }
> 		P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
> 		P.western { so-language: en-GB }
> 	-->
> 	</STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY LANG="en-GB" DIR="LTR">
> <P CLASS="western" STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Test</P>
> </BODY>
> </HTML>
>
> which I think is a lot cleaner than word would produce for the same
> document.
>
> Rgds
>
> Denis McMahon

lol,

Yes, MS Word kicks out a lot of garbage.  But it's not that hard to 
clean it up.  At least most of the hard work is done.

However, I do agree with you - Open Office is much better.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4114

At 20 Dec 2011 21:15:36 GMT Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> 
> > On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
> >> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
> >> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
> >> course free is preferred.
> 
> > Open it in MS Word
> > Save it in HTML
> 
> You owe me a keyboard cleaning Jerry. Honestly, have you seen the garbage 
> that msword outputs when you ask it for html.
> 
> Open office might be better, I don't know. It generates this for a 
> document containing a single word:

Word Processors (*ALL* of them) generate horrible HTML (MS-Word might
be the worst of the lot).  The problem is the Word Processors are all
'WYSIWYG' and HTML *by definition* is *NOT* WYSIWYG: HTML markup allows
for wide variation in what is displayed -- nothing is set in stone. 
All of the markup is vague and open-ended and the browser is free to do
whatever it likes and the enduser is allowed wide latitude in
configuring almost everything from fonts to screen/window size and
resolution. In order to preserve the 'intended display, the word
processor must use lots of 'torturous' HTML to attempt to force the
proper display.

> 
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
> 	<META HTTP-EQUIV="CONTENT-TYPE" CONTENT="text/html; 
> charset=utf-8">
> 	<TITLE></TITLE>
> 	<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="LibreOffice 3.3  (Unix)">
> 	<META NAME="AUTHOR" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
> 	<META NAME="CREATED" CONTENT="20111220;21113400">
> 	<META NAME="CHANGEDBY" CONTENT="Denis McMahon">
> 	<META NAME="CHANGED" CONTENT="20111220;21122200">
> 	<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
> 	<!--
> 		@page { margin: 2cm }
> 		P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
> 		P.western { so-language: en-GB }
> 	-->
> 	</STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY LANG="en-GB" DIR="LTR">
> <P CLASS="western" STYLE="margin-bottom: 0cm">Test</P>
> </BODY>
> </HTML>
> 
> which I think is a lot cleaner than word would produce for the same 
> document.
> 
> Rgds
> 
> Denis McMahon
>                                                

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software        -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


                                    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4121

On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:16:19 -0600, Robert Heller wrote:
> At 20 Dec 2011 21:15:36 GMT Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> 
>> > On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
>> >> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>> >> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>> >> course free is preferred.
>> 
>> > Open it in MS Word
>> > Save it in HTML
>> 
>> You owe me a keyboard cleaning Jerry. Honestly, have you seen the garbage 
>> that msword outputs when you ask it for html.
>> 
>> Open office might be better, I don't know. It generates this for a 
>> document containing a single word:
>
> Word Processors (*ALL* of them) generate horrible HTML (MS-Word might
> be the worst of the lot).  The problem is the Word Processors are all
> 'WYSIWYG' and HTML *by definition* is *NOT* WYSIWYG: HTML markup allows
> for wide variation in what is displayed -- nothing is set in stone. 
> All of the markup is vague and open-ended and the browser is free to do
> whatever it likes and the enduser is allowed wide latitude in
> configuring almost everything from fonts to screen/window size and
> resolution. In order to preserve the 'intended display, the word
> processor must use lots of 'torturous' HTML to attempt to force the
> proper display.

Isn't that ideal? Funnily enough, that's how most word processors work
these days, at least in the hands of people that actually know how to
use them instead of that merely think they do. The evidence of this
is that every real word processor these days includes the ability to
mark up text exactly like HTML does, and the magic ability to redefine
the styles associated with the classes of text, exactly like cascading
style sheets do. The issue is an astronomical percentage of people
using Word never touch the things and do all that kind of stuff by
hand instead. Which doesn't make the HTML output of Word any better.
When used properly, Word doesn't generate HTML much worse than any
bottom-rack, one-semester-of-experience HTML "designer". When given an
elaborate document created by the average typist-turned-electronic
keyboard jockey, that turns into a complete mess. But that's not (all)
Word's fault. There's just a lot more idiots using Word to create HTML
output that there are using LibreOffice to create HTML.

-- 
56. My Legions of Terror will be trained in basic marksmanship. Any who
    cannot learn to hit a man-sized target at 10 meters will be used 
    for target practice.
	--Peter Anspach's list of things to do as an Evil Overlord

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4123

At Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:59:29 -0600 "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> wrote:

> 
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:16:19 -0600, Robert Heller wrote:
> > At 20 Dec 2011 21:15:36 GMT Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 
> >> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:05:34 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On 12/19/2011 7:06 PM, Michael Joel wrote:
> >> >> I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
> >> >> supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
> >> >> course free is preferred.
> >> 
> >> > Open it in MS Word
> >> > Save it in HTML
> >> 
> >> You owe me a keyboard cleaning Jerry. Honestly, have you seen the garbage 
> >> that msword outputs when you ask it for html.
> >> 
> >> Open office might be better, I don't know. It generates this for a 
> >> document containing a single word:
> >
> > Word Processors (*ALL* of them) generate horrible HTML (MS-Word might
> > be the worst of the lot).  The problem is the Word Processors are all
> > 'WYSIWYG' and HTML *by definition* is *NOT* WYSIWYG: HTML markup allows
> > for wide variation in what is displayed -- nothing is set in stone. 
> > All of the markup is vague and open-ended and the browser is free to do
> > whatever it likes and the enduser is allowed wide latitude in
> > configuring almost everything from fonts to screen/window size and
> > resolution. In order to preserve the 'intended display, the word
> > processor must use lots of 'torturous' HTML to attempt to force the
> > proper display.
> 
> Isn't that ideal? Funnily enough, that's how most word processors work
> these days, at least in the hands of people that actually know how to
> use them instead of that merely think they do. The evidence of this
> is that every real word processor these days includes the ability to
> mark up text exactly like HTML does, and the magic ability to redefine
> the styles associated with the classes of text, exactly like cascading
> style sheets do. The issue is an astronomical percentage of people
> using Word never touch the things and do all that kind of stuff by
> hand instead. Which doesn't make the HTML output of Word any better.
> When used properly, Word doesn't generate HTML much worse than any
> bottom-rack, one-semester-of-experience HTML "designer". When given an
> elaborate document created by the average typist-turned-electronic
> keyboard jockey, that turns into a complete mess. But that's not (all)
> Word's fault. There's just a lot more idiots using Word to create HTML
> output that there are using LibreOffice to create HTML.

The problem is mostly the fault of the WYSIWYG editer / user-interface.
It makes it way too easy to use 'visual design' (which is bad), rather
than 'logical design' (which is good).  Document preparation systems
like LaTeX *separate* the editor function from the generation function.
This forces one to use logical design, which results in cleanly
formatted documents (and if generating HTML, clean and simple HTML).

> 

-- 
Robert Heller             -- 978-544-6933 / heller@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software        -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments


                                                                                                          

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4126

Peter H. Coffin wrote:
> Which doesn't make the HTML output of Word any better.
> When used properly, Word doesn't generate HTML much worse than any
> bottom-rack, one-semester-of-experience HTML "designer". When given an
> elaborate document created by the average typist-turned-electronic
> keyboard jockey, that turns into a complete mess. But that's not (all)
> Word's fault. There's just a lot more idiots using Word to create HTML
> output that there are using LibreOffice to create HTML.
> 

Indeed. They apply similar algorithms to Japanese and Chinese 
instruction manuals..

http://www.engrish.com/category/computer/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4110

On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:06:52 -0500, Michael Joel <no@please.com>
wrote:

>I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
>supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
>course free is preferred.
>
>Thanks
>Mike


I was hoping there might be some way to work with RTF file in php...
kind of like you can do PDF - without having to study the file format
docs.

Thanks
Mike

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4111

In article <o0i1f7hdlpp5q8gtcttb03k4lhq0v89umg@4ax.com>,
Michael Joel  <no@please.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 19:06:52 -0500, Michael Joel <no@please.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >I could really use some "add on" app/script that would allow me to
> >supply a RTF (rich text format) file and it translate it to HTML. Of
> >course free is preferred.
> 
> I was hoping there might be some way to work with RTF file in php...
> kind of like you can do PDF - without having to study the file format
> docs.

Like this? http://www.lmgtfy.com?q=parse+rtf+in+php

First hit looks likely.

Cheers
Tony
-- 
Tony Mountifield
Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk
Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.php

csiph-web