CONVERTING A MICROSOFT TEMPLATE TO BE USED WITH LIBRE OFFICE

users
#1

MSFT has been/is making their system(s) incompatible with others in
order to reap a higher profit-margin ;-(

       Therefore switching away from MSFT is a great way to - possibly -
show them the errors of their ways :wink:

       Now, if you could explain just what you're attempting to do, maybe
someone on this list will be able to help -
             the LO writer program does whatever I would like - and more
than the MSFT version ...
             the LO ppt program as well - including its ability to convert
to video ...

                 [I need to see an example of what your attempting to do]

             as for the LO spreadsheet - many on this list seem to use this
feature;
                 [I do not]

       Hoping you'll be able to find an answer anon,

Cc:
WITH LIBRE OFFICE

Good day,

I have tried to register but without success. I am trying to find
assistance with the conversion of a Microsoft Global Template (Normal.dot)
to be used with LibreOffice Writer as the Global template.

The template was 'created' for me for ofice convention service writing and
I am alos using it in my day to day activities away from the office. I am
trying to move away from the Mircrosoft platform and environment, therefore
the assistance.

I have tried the wizard in LibreOffice, however for some reason I cannot
get it to function. I receive a warning that macros might harm the system
if allowed. However, irrespective, cannot use it. Not sure where I am
going wrong.

Within Microsoft it can be added as a banner and one only click on the
required numbering and thereafter tab, etc to make full use of the
functionality. It was designed for Office 97 to 2000 and only works on
certain computers with Office 2007/2010 as a plug-in.

However, as indicated, I want to move away from Microsoft, my entire system
has been setup with only FOSS/OSS, but the template would make life much
easier if I can get it to work. I am not skilled in the 'Macro/template'
environment although I do understand some of the coding (limited).

Is there anyone that can assisit me in this regard.

Kind Regards.

Herman

#2

"anne-ology" MSFT has been/is making their system(s) incompatible with others in
order to reap a higher profit-margin ;-(

For the last 23 years Microsoft Office has changed its format TWICE.
Meanwhile, Libreoffice cannot open its own documents from 2001.

#3

Microsoft has slightly changed the file format for each new release,
although it has never changed the extension. Are you paid by Microsoft?
Only someone paid by Microsoft could say such an incredible lie. This is
not the first time that you say something which is clearly biased in the
typical Microsoft way (i.e. total FUD). I do not think that you are
adding any value here, and IMHO you should be banned from the community
as you are not welcome at all.

#4

Urmas wrote:

Meanwhile, Libreoffice cannot open its own documents from 2001.

Yeah, that really a problem, especially since LO didn't exist back then.

#5

You again

Darn M$ Corp shill talking trash as per usual .

pete

#6

+1

Pete .

#7

"James Knott":

Yeah, that really a problem, especially since LO didn't exist back then.

It was called StarOffice back then.

#8

Hi :slight_smile:
Not quite. It may have changed the name of the formats it uses twice but
OOXML (the .docX etc) has at least 4 different versions including 3
different "transitional" versions and all are apparently quite different
from the version they managed to get accredited as an ISO format.

The older format (.doc etc) also seem to vary considerably between each
different version of MS Office.

MS Office 2010 or 2013 often has problems opening documents created in MS
Office 2007.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#9

Hey,
Easy tigers! Remember this is meant to be a family-friendly environment!
Not that i've ever met a friendly family and kids these days seem to know
more about swearing than the adults but lets pretend they don't know 'em
and just avoid teaching them any new ones!
Regards from
Tom :wink:

#10

Hi :slight_smile:
Nice answer! :))) I think top-marks to James. My answer was too ponderous
and boring.

Of course i think Star Office and maybe even OpenOffice were around back
then so in a way LibreOffice was, but just not under the same name. (kinda
the opposite of MS formats as it happens!)
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#11

Hi :slight_smile:
It should be possible to just double-click on the Normal.doc to open it.

However, it is probably full of junk by now = such as tons of extraneous
coding and odd references to stuff that is long gone and maybe your address
and other people's names and systems that the template has been used on.
Try opening it with a text editor to see what's in there!!

So, i think you are over-complicating it. Just double-click to open it and
then do;
File - "Save As Template"
to convert it (and all the messy coding it contains) into a LibreOffice
Template.

Although it might be a bit messy right now it's probably still usable. At
some point it might be nice to start afresh but possibly not until you have
time.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#12

Good day,

Thank you for your reply.  I have copied the Microsoft Word Normal.dot file into my Home Folder/Documents (Ubuntu 12.04 LTS).  Open LibreOffice Writer 3.5.7.2 and followed the follwoing steps:

File > Wizards > Document Converter > Microsoft Office > Word Documents > Next > Word Templates (Did not select include sub directories).  Changed the Import to the correct location: /home/herman/Documents.

The save to I have left unchanged:  /home/herman/.config/libreoffice/3/user/template/Imported_Templates

I have unselect Documents. > Next , I then receive a message tahat indicates that the /home/herman/.config/libreoffice/3/user/template/Imported_Templates directory does not exisit and if I would like to create it > Yes

The following message is received:

All Word templates contained in the following directory will be imported:
/home/iss/Documents
All subdirectories will be taken into account
These will be exported to the following directory:
/home/herman/.config/libreoffice/3/user/template/Imported_Templates

Convert

Documents converted and the following log file is generated:

Word templates
Source documents
Target documents
Normal.dot Normal.ott
Document macro has to be revised.

When verifying under > Files > Templates > Organise > Imported templates the template is vissible Clax Template CSW Version 3.0 Off97 (Final Edition)

Within MS Office, this template is available under > View > Toolbars and when selected it adds it as a Toolbar, however in Office Writer I cannot find it here.

I have tried running a Macro > Tools > Macros > Run Macro but the requires to install Java runtime, which I did, but still cannot find my template to execute.

I have tried > File > New > Templates and Documents > Selected the converted Template (Clax Template CSW Version 3.0 Off97 (Final Edition)) and then Receive a warning that Macros could contain viruses.  I accept but the Template still does not work as it should.

Attached the template.  It works well with Microsoft Office up to verion 2003 but in some cases with Office 2007/2010 as a plug-in id does not function.

Hope my explanations help.

Kind regards.

Herman

Hi :) 
It should be possible to just double-click on the Normal.doc to open it.

However, it is probably full of junk by now = such as tons of extraneous coding and odd references to stuff that is long gone and maybe your address and other people's names and systems that the template has been used on.  Try opening it with a text editor to see what's in there!!

So, i think you are over-complicating it.  Just double-click to open it and then do;

File - "Save As Template"

to convert it (and all the messy coding it contains) into a LibreOffice Template.

Although it might be a bit messy right now it's probably still usable.  At some point it might be nice to start afresh but possibly not until you have time.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

MSFT has been/is making their system(s) incompatible with others in

#13

Documents converted and the following log file is generated:
[...]
Normal.dot Normal.ott
Document macro has to be revised.

That's probably the best you can do without editing your template further yourself - in particular its contained macro(s).

Within MS Office, this template is available under > View > Toolbars and when selected it adds it as a Toolbar, however in Office Writer I cannot find it here.

There is - at least, potentially - a New Document From Template button in the Standard toolbar. If you don't see it, click the down-arrow at the right end of this toolbar and select Visible Buttons > | New Document From Template. It should stick.

Alternative ways to get at a template are:
o File | New > | Templates and Documents (as you mention)
o Down-arrow next to the New button in the Standard toolbar | Templates and Documents
o Templates... from the start screen
o Set your template as the default and then just open a new text document
o (If you are using Windows) Right-click the Quickstarter icon in the System Tray | From Template...

I have tried running a Macro > Tools > Macros > Run Macro but the requires to install Java runtime, which I did, but still cannot find my template to execute.

No: your template is not a macro, though it apparently contains macros.

Attached the template.

Attached files are generally not distributed by the list processor, so no-one except the two explicit addressees of your message will have seen this.

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker

#14

Urmas, you are right.

Yes, I too, remember a guarantee made by the LibreOffice project on its
inception to "future-proof" one's data against arbitrary changes in file
format or vendor support...funny how the wheel turns isn't it ?

The dev working on LO didn't like the StarOffice binary filter code, so
they got rid of it, simple as that - they certainly didn't care whether
people who had started using the "original" product, the one that gave
birth both to OOo and LO, over 10 years ago would still want that file
format supported - "data guarantee" I hear you say ? Bah, humbug.
Clearly a case of :"if you're not working on the codebase, we're not
listening to you, lalalala, sticks fingers in ears..."

There was nothing seriously broken about the binary filter code used to
support those binary sd* file types, but it was a hefty chunk of code to
get rid of from the code base, and met the goal of reducing "code clutter".

Then the LO project had the gall to sign itself up to some document
format project that will claim to support all those old document
formats...hahaha, the irony of it all...

In many respects, some open source projects are no better than closed
source ones where their management and communication is concerned. Inept
is inept, spin is spin, marketing is marketing - beauty is in the eye of
the holder, so to speak.

Well, thank you for listening to my little rant for today, I'll crawl
back under that rock I call LibreOffice QA, ROFLMAO.

Alex

#15

The dev working on LO didn't like the StarOffice binary filter code

  Hated it with a passion is probably a better description than "didn't
like" - that code screwed us over and held us back very significantly.
It was a cut/paste of almost (which is part of the problem, the shared
code was really hard to change) the entirety of an ancient version of
the code-base, and a disaster in a box from so many aspects - whether
security, maintainability, binary download size, etc. etc.

so they got rid of it

  Whoot :slight_smile:

There was nothing seriously broken about the binary filter code used to
support those binary sd* file types

  I beg to differ =) That it mostly still worked doesn't mean it was not
fundamentally broken in many ways that are not immediately visible to
those not involved with the code particularly around its design and
architecture.

Well, thank you for listening to my little rant for today, I'll crawl
back under that rock I call LibreOffice QA, ROFLMAO.

  Heh - so, the solution to this problem is (IMNSHO) to work on the new
libreveng versions of these filters to (at least initially) rescue the
core data, and ultimately the full feature set in less code, and inside
a much cleaner and more maintainable infrastructure. Its not such
difficult work even - it doesn't even require re-building the main
LibreOffice code (just that particular smallish filter), and I'm sure
Fridrich & co. would love help there if newbie developers want to get
involved.

  ATB,

    Michael.

#16

It's no secret that LO users tend to dislike M$. While I love LO, I've tended to give M$ perhaps more benefit of the doubt than they deserve. I still use Windows 7 on my laptop, although after many fits and starts, I have finally succeeded in getting a true dual boot Ubuntu setup. I'm using Ubuntu as much as I can to see just how much (or little) I still need Windows.

But, last evening, M$ threw me a curveball that I found utterly unacceptable. In addition to my laptop, I have a slightly older desktop that runs Windows XP. In the last few says, the XP machine has been acting *very* strangely. I've run RKill and virus scans, which have come up empty. Then, I noticed a GREAT BIG RED "X" on my Security Essentials icon. I clicked on it to read M$'s message: The OS is no longer supported (which I knew) and, therefore, Microsoft Security Essentials will no longer work properly (which I did not know). Ergo, my computer is now considered "at risk." M$ was kind enough to provide a link to "End of Support Guidance."

To play along, I clicked the link and was taken to a M$ website. The website suggested that I upgrade to Windows 8.1 at a cost of between $120 and $200 (personal vs. pro). But, it warned me that if my PC were too old, then 8.1 wouldn't work. So, my other option? M$ suggests I buy a new PC. The gall; buy a new PC because M$ chooses to no longer support the OS? No thanks. They were also kind enough to provide a link where I could check to see if my PC would run 8.1. Since I have no intention of purchasing 8.1, I declined their offer to have my PC checked.

Of course, I have another option. Now that I'm growing more and more comfortable with Ubuntu, I'll just install it on my desktop. While I still have Windows 7 on my dual boot, I may go whole hog with the desktop and completely blow off Windows... since M$ doesn't consider it worth their time to support it anyway.

Now, I realize that the day will come when my Ubuntu 12.04LTS will no longer be supported. But, there are a couple differences. First, Ubuntu clearly states on its website when 12.04 support will expire, so I know going in what I'm getting into. M$ gave me no such warning when I purchased my XP machine years ago. Second, when 12.04LTS support goes by the wayside, Ubuntu will have another *free* alternative available; and even if they don't, there's always Debian, Mint, Mint Debian, OpenSuse, Puppy, Slackware, Fedora, Puppy, Slax, and on and on.

Sorry M$ (and Urmas). While I have tried to avoid the M$ rage I've read on this and other lists, your latest consumer disrespect has thrown me over to the dark side.

Give me penguins.

Virgil

#17

It's no secret that LO users tend to dislike M$. While I love LO, I've tended to give M$ perhaps more benefit of the doubt than they deserve. I still use Windows 7 on my laptop, although after many fits and starts, I have finally succeeded in getting a true dual boot Ubuntu setup. I'm using Ubuntu as much as I can to see just how much (or little) I still need Windows.

But, last evening, M$ threw me a curveball that I found utterly unacceptable. In addition to my laptop, I have a slightly older desktop that runs Windows XP. In the last few says, the XP machine has been acting *very* strangely. I've run RKill and virus scans, which have come up empty. Then, I noticed a GREAT BIG RED "X" on my Security Essentials icon. I clicked on it to read M$'s message: The OS is no longer supported (which I knew) and, therefore, Microsoft Security Essentials will no longer work properly (which I did not know). Ergo, my computer is now considered "at risk." M$ was kind enough to provide a link to "End of Support Guidance."

To play along, I clicked the link and was taken to a M$ website. The website suggested that I upgrade to Windows 8.1 at a cost of between $120 and $200 (personal vs. pro). But, it warned me that if my PC were too old, then 8.1 wouldn't work. So, my other option? M$ suggests I buy a new PC. The gall; buy a new PC because M$ chooses to no longer support the OS? No thanks. They were also kind enough to provide a link where I could check to see if my PC would run 8.1. Since I have no intention of purchasing 8.1, I declined their offer to have my PC checked.

Of course, I have another option. Now that I'm growing more and more comfortable with Ubuntu, I'll just install it on my desktop. While I still have Windows 7 on my dual boot, I may go whole hog with the desktop and completely blow off Windows... since M$ doesn't consider it worth their time to support it anyway.

Now, I realize that the day will come when my Ubuntu 12.04LTS will no longer be supported. But, there are a couple differences. First, Ubuntu clearly states on its website when 12.04 support will expire, so I know going in what I'm getting into. M$ gave me no such warning when I purchased my XP machine years ago. Second, when 12.04LTS support goes by the wayside, Ubuntu will have another *free* alternative available; and even if they don't, there's always Debian, Mint, Mint Debian, OpenSuse, Puppy, Slackware, Fedora, Puppy, Slax, and on and on.

Sorry M$ (and Urmas). While I have tried to avoid the M$ rage I've read on this and other lists, your latest consumer disrespect has thrown me over to the dark side.

Give me penguins.

Virgil

+1

#18

That's odd. You may want to bookmark http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle for future reference. Apparently XP was originally intended to expire at the end of 2011 - ten years after its release - but this was postponed in 2007 to this month. So whenever you purchased it, you would have expected expiration either now or much sooner.

(Er, no: I am not taking sides. But I do like to see arguments being based on evidence.)

Brian Barker

#19

I think the real point is the MS is not providing a reasonable upgrade for many users. Both in terms of cost and ease. Many with XP can not run W8 at all and have three options: continue to use XP, replace the computer which is still working, or replace the OS with a Linux distro. Since most Linux distros are free, replacing XP with Linux is the cheapest option and viable for many. Also, there is no direct upgrade path from XP to W7 and I assume this is true for W8 also. Thus, XP has to installed first then it is wiped out by the new OS which means all the applications and data must be reinstalled (after first saving the data).

Virgil noted he knew about the expiration of XP which is not the real issue.

#20

Jay Lozier wrote:

Also, there is no direct upgrade path from XP to W7 and I assume this
is true for W8 also.

I run openSUSE Linux on my computers and have for several years. It's
generally possible to to an upgrade as new versions come out. I
recently upgraded my motherboard & hard drive (old drive was IDE and new
MB only supports SATA), as the old MB was getting slow. I just copied
my system to the new drive and then moved to the new motherboard and it
works fine. With Linux, drivers also tend to be supported much longer
than in Windows, so that old hardware will generally continue to work
just fine. For example, I have an Epson scanner, which I bought several
years ago. It worked with both Linux and XP. However, while it still
works fine in Linux, I cannot use it with Windows 7, as the drivers are
not available for it.