moderated #bug Italics and other rich text formatting don't transfer to or from text files #bug


Kamaloo <k_amaloo@...>
 

Hello!

I have a minor request/bug report - would it be possible for rich text formatting such as bolding, italics and similar to be transferable when you select and copy text, or when you paste it in a post when it has been copied from a document? I know it's possible, because Yahoo Groups did it, but I haven't been able to replicate it on my groups. It's a bit tedious to go through pasted text to find and re-insert the formatting, so I hope it can be implemented in groups.io.

This is the main way I use the groups, so I hope something can be done!

TLDR; - text copied from a post on groups.io to a RTF or Word document doesn't retain the formatting information. Text copied from a RTF or Word document to a post on groups.io doesn't retain the formatting information. Is it possible to fix this?

Thanks!
 - Kamaloo


Andy
 

It works when I did a copy-and-paste.  The formatting was preserved, when copying from a Word document into a Groups.io post written in its web interface.  There are many variations possible, maybe you need to be more specific?  An example:

This is plain text.

This is italicized.

This is bold.  This is bold underlined.

This is a bulleted list:

·         Item 1

·         Item 2

·         Item 3


OK, so the bulleted list did not copy correctly.  But italics and bold and underlining did.  I wonder if the group you tried this with enforces plain-text only?

Andy


 

I am constantly advising my group members not to copy/paste Word docs. The most noticeable problem is the extra line spaces that are added.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

But the post is about text docs, not Word docs.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Kamaloo <k_amaloo@...>
 

Thank you for your fast reply!

I'll admit I haven't tried this extensively with Word - I mainly use Wordpad RTF files. I did check under Admin->Settings->Message Formatting that plain text hasn't been forced, but it hasn't.

On further thought, it may be that pasting directly to the web interface works - I'll have to test it again (I often use reply from email, in which case the email must be the problem then). But copying the formatting from the web interface to a Wordpad file, which is what I always do to prepare my replies, still doesn't copy the formatting. Could this be an issue of compatibility with Wordpad, somehow? Rich text shouldn't be a problem, should it?

Thanks!


Kamaloo <k_amaloo@...>
 

Hello again!

I checked with pasting directly into the web interface from a Wordpad .rtf file, but the formatting was not preserved.


Duane
 

On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM, Kamaloo wrote:
Rich text shouldn't be a problem, should it?
There are differences between rtf and html.  The site can use html (some functions disabled for safety) or markdown.

Duane


Glenn Glazer
 

On 04/18/2021 10:02, Duane wrote:
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM, Kamaloo wrote:
Rich text shouldn't be a problem, should it?
There are differences between rtf and html.  The site can use html (some functions disabled for safety) or markdown.

Duane

This is correct. While RTF and HTML are both markup languages, the syntax and functionality of RTF (a TeX based language) and bears more similarity to PDF (and PostScript before it) than to HTML or XML.

There are several really big differences between the two groups of languages, the RTF/PDF and the HTML/XML:

* The former are proprietary languages (MS/Adobe respectively), the latter are free and open standards.
* The former are focused primarily on creating files to be displayed with a viewer, whereas the latter are primarily about internet communication.
* The former have a large number of functions for drawing shapes and pictures in the output, this is hard in HTML and impossible in XML (without actually including a binary in the document).
* Conversely, if you want imbed an existing image into the document, the latter support many more image formats than the former.

To the main point of the conversation, if RTF were to be supported, Mark would have to find or write an RTF parser which is different than an HTML parser and then integrate that parser into existing code. That's a lot of work for a format that is fading into obsolescence. Even MS doesn't use it for help files anymore, which was RTF's original purpose.

Best,

Glenn

--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


Kamaloo <k_amaloo@...>
 

Oh, that's too bad. I thought RTF wasn't proprietary. Thank you for the explanation!

Cheers,
Kamaloo