LO 3.4.3 Writer cannot handle RTF document

System: Windows XP SP3 (+everything after it)
LO: LibreOffice 3.4.3
OOO340m1 (Build:302)

Recently my PC died (and with it the "freebie" version of Word 2002
(10.2627.2625)) and I having never had any problems with XLS files and LO
Calc, I expected LO Writer to have little trouble with he following very
simple Word .RTF document.

How wrong can one be...

I would appreciate it if someone could have a look at to why this document
doesn't display the way it should be displayed.

=== CUT ===
{\rtf1\ansi\uc1\deff0
{\fonttbl
{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2 Times New Roman;}
{\f1\fmodern\fcharset0\fprq1 Courier New;}
{\f2\fscript\fcharset0\fprq2 Monotype Corsiva;}}
\paperw11907\paperh16840\margl992\margr1418\margt567\margb567
\pard\plain\qj
\fs20
{\b\f2\fs32\qc XXXXXX XX XXXXX Ltd\par }
\par
\par
{\b\ql XXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX\par
XXXXXXX XXX\par
XXXX XXXXXXXX\par
XXXXXXX}
{\ul
\par
\par
\par }
\pard
\ql
\tx993
\tx1985
\tqdec
\tx2694
{Invoice no:
\tab XXXXX-XX
\tab
\tab Date:
\tab XX XXXXXXXXX 2011
\par }
\pard
{\ql\par
\par
Dear Sirs,\par
\par }
\pard
{\qj You have never received written permission to send any email to
"xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx" and as such the ten emails that my company,
the owner of the xxxxx.xxx domain, received on 2010-05-28, 2010-06-29,
2010-09-29, 2011-01-26 (3x), 2011-02-23, 2011-03-25, 2011-05-26 and
2011-06-22 are SPAM, in direct violation of EU directive 2002/58/EC.\par
\par
As it costs me time and effort to deal with such messages, time that I
could otherwise use more productively, and because I have called you
before about the abuse of this email address used by my company in July
2010 and March 2011 I have no other choice than to charge you for this
time. I think a reasonable amount is GBP 100 per spam message, but if
you think that this is too much, I am quite happy to let the courts in
England decide on a more appropriate amount, in the case of Nigel
Roberts v Media Logistics Limited before the Colchester County Court in
2005 (Claim No: 5CO03667) the defendant paid GBP 300 to settle the
claim for a {\b single} spam message.\par
\par
Needlessly to say, I also want you to remove every trace of the above
email address from your systems.\par
\par }
\trowd\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx5529\cellx6664
\pard\ql\intbl
{Processing 10 spam messages @ GBP 100 per message\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
\tqdec\tx593 {\b 1,000.00\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
{\trowd\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx5529\cellx6664\row }
\pard\ql\intbl
{VAT @ 20%\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
\tqdec\tx593 {\b 200.00\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
{\trowd\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx5529\cellx6664\row }
\trowd\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx6664
\pard\ql\intbl
{\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
{\trowd\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx6664\row }
\trowd\lastrow\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx4819\cellx5529\cellx6664
\pard\ql\intbl
{\b Total amount due\cell }
{\b GBP\cell }
\pard\ql\intbl
\tqdec\tx593 {\b 1,200.00\cell }
\pard\ql
{\trowd\lastrow\trgaph107\trleft-107\cellx4819\cellx5529\cellx6664\row }
\par
\pard
\qj
{Payment is due }
{\b immediately}
{, please transfer the sum above to our account with XXXXXXXXX plc. Our
banking details are:\par }
\par
\pard
\ql
\tx1276
\tx1418
{\b Accountholder}{\tab :\tab }
{\f1 XXXXXX XX XXXXX Ltd\par }
{\b IBAN}{\tab :\tab }
{\f1 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX\par }
{\b BIC}{\tab :\tab }
{\f1 XXXXXXXXXXX\par\par }
\pard
\ql
{The address of the bank is:\par
\par }
{\b XXXXXXXXX XX plc,\par
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,\par
XXX XX XXXXXXX XXXXXX,\par
XXXXXXX,\par
XX XXX,\par
XXXXXX XXXXXXX\par }
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
\par
{\b\f1\fs16\qj
XXXXXX XX XXXXX Ltd reserves the right to claim statutory interest at 8%
above the
Bank of England reference rate in force on the date the debt becomes
overdue and at
any subsequent rate where the reference rate changes and the debt remains
unpaid in
accordance with the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 as
amended
and supplemented by the Late Payment of Commercial Debts Regulations 2002.
\par }
\pard
\par
\pard
\qc
{\f1\fs16 XXXXXX XX XXXXX Limited, XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXX,
XXXXXXX, XXX XXX\par
Registered in England No XXXXXXX Registered office as above }
{\b\f1\fs16 VAT number XXX XXXX XX}}
=== CUT ===

Robert

Robert,

System: Windows XP SP3 (+everything after it)
LO: LibreOffice 3.4.3
OOO340m1 (Build:302)

Recently my PC died (and with it the "freebie" version of Word 2002
(10.2627.2625)) and I having never had any problems with XLS files and LO
Calc, I expected LO Writer to have little trouble with he following very
simple Word .RTF document.

How wrong can one be...

I would appreciate it if someone could have a look at to why this document
doesn't display the way it should be displayed.

Can you open the file in WordPad? I am wondering if the file itself is
corrupted. The rtf format normally is well behaved and opens properly in
a variety of programs.

Hi :slight_smile:
If a machine appears to be dead then often you can still use it by booting
up a "LiveCd session" of a Gnu&Linux distro. Here is a guide for Ubuntu
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCD
but the rest all work pretty much the same way too.

Often the LiveCd is the same as the installer Cd. The Ubuntu ones often
need you to click on the install button at the main first choice but then
press the back button to get back to the choice and choose "Try it" instead.
Otherwise the machine seems to hang for me.

Once you are in a LiveCd session you can use the "Places" menu on the
top-taskbar to find files on your hard-drive or to access the network or
other storage devices. Firefox tends to automatically find your internet
connection. A 'dead' Windows is an opportunity to try out something more
interesting in order to recover data or fix the system.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Using the RTF as provided in Robert's e-mail, Wordpad displays everything
through the "Total amount due" row and that is the end. The additional RTF
after that row is has no effect.

In Microsoft Word 2010, the document displays completely, all the way down to
the Registered in England line with VAT number placeholder at the bottom of
the page.

Libre Office 3.3.2 also opens the RTF document perfectly, except that one line
at the bottom of the page rolls off onto a separate sheet. The layout is not
quite so faithful as the Word 2010 appears to be.

I saved the Word version as an ODF Text (.odt) document and it is all there.
I had to delete two rows of blank lines to get the bottom matter back onto the
single sheet (perhaps because of default paper-size differences on my US
configuration).

I can make the ODT available to Robert if that satisfies his short-term
requirement. It doesn't explain why WordPad 6.1 SP1 stumbles.

PS: Wordpad also opens the ODT just fine. There is a warning about not all
features being preserved. The only obvious difference is that the table in
the middle of the page now has visible borders and cell separators. I also
notice some places where there is no space between words. The line
justification and centerings seem to be perfect.

prino wrote:

I would appreciate it if someone could have a look at to why this document
doesn't display the way it should be displayed.

Actually RTF must be the worse format in the world :slight_smile:

I opened your document under XP SP3 Pro x86 in 6 different word processors
and it didn't look the same in any two: Wordpad, Abiword 2.9.0, LibreOffice
3.4.4RC2, IBM Lotus Symphony 3, Kingsoft Office 2012 and Softmaker Office
2012.

I would say that the only one where it looked complete and properly
formatted was in Softmaker, which isn't surprising :slight_smile:

If you are using LibreOffice I advise you to stick with ODF. If you need to
send files to people who don't use LibreOffice, then stick with doc (not
docx)

Hi Dennis :slight_smile:
You can upload the odt to Nabble quite easily. Just click on the link in
this post to get to the right thread (or navigate to it), reply to a post
and click on "More Options" to find the "upload file" option
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Tom wrote:

If a machine appears to be dead then often you can still use it by booting
up a "LiveCd session" of a Gnu&Linux distro.

Not in this case, a number of the capacitors on the motherboard have blown
and even with replacements it won't boot anymore. :frowning:

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

Using the RTF as provided in Robert's e-mail, Wordpad displays everything
through the "Total amount due" row and that is the end. The additional
RTF
after that row is has no effect.

Same here, I've got other similar invoices but they display OK. Now trying
to figure out the difference.

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

In Microsoft Word 2010, the document displays completely, all the way down
to
the Registered in England line with VAT number placeholder at the bottom
of
the page.

Libre Office 3.3.2 also opens the RTF document perfectly, except that one
line
at the bottom of the page rolls off onto a separate sheet. The layout is
not
quite so faithful as the Word 2010 appears to be.

I saved the Word version as an ODF Text (.odt) document and it is all
there.
I had to delete two rows of blank lines to get the bottom matter back onto
the
single sheet (perhaps because of default paper-size differences on my US
configuration).

The document is for (European) A4, and US Letter is ~18 mm shorter, which
explains the page-overflow.

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

I can make the ODT available to Robert if that satisfies his short-term
requirement. It doesn't explain why WordPad 6.1 SP1 stumbles.

No need, these are old invoices, I can make future ones with Writer, but
given the fact hat the full RTF spec is available, I would have expected
Writer to handle it.

Robert

Pedro wrote:

prino wrote:

I would appreciate it if someone could have a look at to why this
document doesn't display the way it should be displayed.

Actually RTF must be the worse format in the world :slight_smile:

I opened your document under XP SP3 Pro x86 in 6 different word processors
and it didn't look the same in any two: Wordpad, Abiword 2.9.0,
LibreOffice 3.4.4RC2, IBM Lotus Symphony 3, Kingsoft Office 2012 and
Softmaker Office 2012.

I would say that the only one where it looked complete and properly
formatted was in Softmaker, which isn't surprising :slight_smile:

If you are using LibreOffice I advise you to stick with ODF. If you need
to send files to people who don't use LibreOffice, then stick with doc
(not docx)

If I need to send documents to others, I use plain text, where I might add
some *bold* or _underscore_ "tags", but nothing more. Files are small and
everyone can read plain text!

Actually, other than the fact that LibreOffice cannot read (some) RTF
correctly, its implementation of an RTF writer is absolute, excusez-le-mot,
Sh*te, with a capital S! It doesn't do any factoring of tags, and the
documents it produces are humongous.

An example?

I have a program that processes my, don't laugh, hitchhiking data. (Yes, at
the age of 51 I still hitchhike, see http://hitchwiki.org/community/prino/ )
It optionally outputs the files in RTF format (it dates back to the early
1990'ies, i.e. well before OO & LO) All of the resulting RTF files contain
the absolute minimum of tags and one has a size of just 299kb, a mere 26kb
more than the plain text file.

M$ Word was already bad, blowing it up to around 330kb, but LO Writer
completely takes the piss by saving it as a 1.1Mb RTF file, and looking at
it makes you wonder why Writer adds the same set of completely irrelevant
tags over and over and over (and over and over ad nauseam) again.

As an aside, the fact that it's very easy to turn plain text into RTF using
about any editor and/or simple scripts is a big advantage that RTF has over
ODF, try making an ODT file on IBM's z/OS...

Robert

Hi :slight_smile:
I think the best bet is to start a fresh document and copy&paste the contents of the old document into it and save as "Odt". You will find that is radically smaller than you expect and gets rid of a lot of the kludgy mess of hidden code stored in the document.

Once you have an Odt that you can edit as the original document you can then use "Save As .." to use formats that other people might prefer. Odt is becoming very much more popular and usage has risen dramatically even in the last few weeks let alone the last year.

Rtf is not plain text. It was built by Microsoft as a proprietary format. Although they kept claiming it was open for any other program to use they kept restricting access to upgrades for it until they had been able to incorporate those upgrades into their own programs. Also when developing it they were not hugely interested in the needs of other programs and seemed to be pushing people into buying their product rather than being able to use other people#'s programs. The main MS format was Doc so Rtf never really got the attention it deserved as most of the development effort went into Doc instead. MS are ceasing to develop it at all now and are likely to phase it out in order to push people into their new "Open" format, DocX which can only really be read by MS Office again as they again don't really stick to their alleged specs that are published for other people to use. It is interesting to see that DocX created in MS Office 2010 doesn't always
display properly in MS Office 2007 so people are forced into keeping on buying the newer products.

Rtf doesn't contain all the private data and ancient revision history of a document in the way that Doc tends to. However, it does still contain a lot of kludgy mess. Just try opening it with a text-editor.

Odt and other OpenDocument Formats, such as the spreadsheet one and the presentation one are developed by OASIS which is a conglomeration of many different companies including IBM, Google, TDF. Apache (previously Sun) and many others that want to be able to develop good products and exchange documents easily without relying on Microsoft's benevolence in allowing them to compete with a core profit-making product produced by MS.

Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi :slight_smile:
Sorry for my rant! All just my own opinion of course.

A bad hair day!
Apols and regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

prino wrote:

As an aside, the fact that it's very easy to turn plain text into RTF
using about any editor and/or simple scripts is a big advantage that RTF
has over ODF, try making an ODT file on IBM's z/OS...

It is easy to turn any document into RTF but you never know what will show
up in another editor.

In any case let me make it clear that ODF has the same problem.

I'm not saying ODF is superior to RTF (except that RTF is mostly/completely
abandoned and ODF is under development). I meant that if you are going to
use LibreOffice that is the best file format to use because it is what the
program uses internally. All other formats are converted to ODF at opening
and back at saving.

A client asked me the other day to send him an .rtf version of a file I had
sent to him in Word 97/2000/XP format a few months earlier.

I opened the file in LO 3.3.4 [OOO330m19 (Build:401)] and re-saved it in
.rtf format. I then opened the new .rtf file in LO: flawless.
My client, too, confirmed that the .rtf file was perfect for his purposes.
It felt good being able to help him with this.

OS is Ubuntu 11.04, preinstalled on a new local-brand (Steg) box.

jdh

Hi :slight_smile:
It is great when it does work and yes it's really good to be able to be
highly responsive and adaptable to clients. It's certainly something that
LibreOffice strives for and that is one of the reasons i enjoy using it so
much.

When it doesn't work, even slightly it's all the more annoying because it's
so close and some of the issues that block it from being perfect are outside
of our control. MS tries to stack things in it's own favour (obviously) and
who wouldn't when profit is the main reason for producing anything?
Regard from
Tom :slight_smile:

jdh111 wrote: