Re: OT: Choice of OOo and LaTeX (Was: Tool for document management)
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 06:03:27AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> - From the original post, 08/22/07 15:26 UTC:
> > o handle non-text data as well as some textual data. The main
> > file that is going to change most often is an OOo document (odt).
Here we have the source of some of the confusion. He's already specfied
odt _and_ some non-textual data. This implies something other than
simply some italics.
Since we don't know what type of non-text data, we don't know if it
needs versioning too or how to do it. We've already determined that we
don't know how to version odt.
So: if versioning isn't required, then what is the point of this thread?
If versioning is required, then odt isn't a possibility and people have
recommended LaTex as a suitable alternative that can incorporate
"non-text data" if that means graphics or e.g. formulae.
The only other solution to the versioning of something that you can't
diff would be a full-fledged database with full logging. Check out the
most recent version, edit it, then post it back as a new record. Since
these are files, they'd be 'huge' items in the database.
I don't know. I've never used Word or OO. Prior to LaTex it was lout;
both text markup. Prior to that it was WordPerfect on OS/2 that did its
own versioning, including graphics (since they were vector graphics, the
vertices were what was stored).
Doug.
Reply to: