The inevitable question is raised by a reader
Sun 4 Jan 2009, 08:48 PMTweet
by Ben Langhinrichs
When I posted my Top 10 rendering goals, you might have noticed that I showed an image of how the message looked in Notes, and another with how it looked in Outlook after being converted to MIME by Domino 8, but I didn't show how it looked with CoexLinks 3.0 (pre-beta) right now. I have to admit, that is because there were a few outstanding issues and I didn't want to show it off just yet. After a long weekend of nailing down some niggling bugs, here are the images again, with the first being the Outlook version after conversion by CoexLinks 3.0 (pre-beta), and then the original Notes version for comparison. Below that, I have discussed how well we met the ten goals in this particular sample. (For the sharp-eyed, I changed the subject between when I first sent the message in Notes and when I later sent it with CoexLinks, as I was trying to keep track)
Outlook version after being converted by CoexLinks 3.0 (pre-beta) and then sent via Domino
Original Notes e-mail which was sent to external client (for comparison)
Progress on the top 10 goals, as shown by this sample
- Thin borders which may be on or off as they are in Notes Works well
- Colored table borders Works well
- Fonts sized in point sizes rather than in the HTML sizes Works well
- Font face accuracy for default fonts Works well
- Exact margins/indentation Not perfect, but pretty close
- Accurate table cell widths Works well
- Text highlighters Works well, although the color is slightly different since Notes uses a hashed color and I use a solid color
- Proper list handling Not shown in any depth, but generally works well
- Row and cell padding in tables Works well
- Extended paragraph such as borders and coloring Not shown in this sample
What do you think?
Copyright © 2009 Genii Software Ltd.
What has been said:
740.1. Erik Brooks (01/05/2009 04:40 AM)
Looking good, Ben. I noticed the "1. 2. 3." in the lower-left list is using a different font when processed.
If IBM had spruced up Domino's standard web HTML rendering anytime since, oh, R5, Domino would have been about 500% more RAD than it already was. What's the feasibility of this being incorporated in some way into generic HTML rendering of forms/pages? Imagining a world where a table looks identical in Notes and on the Web brings tears to my eyes. And xPages *still* doesn't bring that to reality. :-(
740.2. Ben Langhinrichs (01/05/2009 04:53 AM)
Erik - This is already available for web editing with our other product, CoexEdit, although some of the work I have done on CoexLinks will wind up being in the next release of CoexEdit. As for a general form/page renderer, I have played with this some and it doesn't seem terribly difficult for the rendering itself, but there are probably nuances of thinks like button clicks that I would have to be very careful to maintain. Perhaps after CoexLinks 3.0 is out, I'll play more with a plug in that would just render a form or page on its way to the web and see what the difficulty would be to do it right. Thanks!
740.3. Jan Schulz (05.01.2009 09:37)
Now we only need a better RT/HTML to plain text converter... the default domino one is horrible :-(
Just send a default reply as "plain text": the header of the quoted message is horrible enough :-(