RE: Re: Any Doc to XML converter ?

> produces very clean XML for me; in what sense is it "mostly garbage"?
> You're not thinking of the "save as HTML" or whatever that is built-in,
> are you?

The article itself says that "The XML output by this application
is very straightforward and very similar to the HTML output by Word itself"

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/odc_expwordtoxml.htm only
describes the styles and formating, and doesn't really describe the content.

A friend of mine is fond of saying "Who needs style when you've got
substance?"

It is "garbage" because it is high on style and low on substance.

Tim Watts

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Joshua Allen
Sent: Thursday, 21 June 2001 10:41 AM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; peter@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE:  Re: Any Doc to XML converter ?


http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/odc_expwordtoxml.htm
produces very clean XML for me; in what sense is it "mostly garbage"?
You're not thinking of the "save as HTML" or whatever that is built-in,
are you?  You can flip on all sorts of extra options with this tool that
add more extra "garbage", but using the simple options faithfully
represents the structure and does a good job with scenario #1 that you
listed below.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Flynn [mailto:peter@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 3:51 PM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re:  Re: Any Doc to XML converter ?
>
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Dmitri wrote:
> > Bob DuCharme wrote:
> >
> > > In his latest 'XML Deviant' column in XML.com
> > > (http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2001/06/13/deviant.html), Leigh Dodds
> describes
> > > and points to a recent thread on the topic.
> >
> > >From a recent MSDN article 'Export a Word Document to XML' by Kevin
> McDowell
> > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/odc_expwordtoxml.htm)
> >
> > 'The XML output by this application is very straightforward and very
> similar to the
> > HTML output by Word itself, but it fully accounts for all styled
text,
> tables, and
> > lists. '
>
> Which may very well be true, but the output is largely garbage
> [assuming] you do want meaningful markup. If all you need is
> the XML representation of the manual styling, then there are
> several solutions already discussed.
>
> ///Peter
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list