Re: RTF specification; RVF versus RTF

Author

Message

Sergey Tkachenko

Posted: 04/14/2005 23:23:44

> 1. Does TRichView fully support any RTF specification? (1.8 seems to be

the

> latest)

Completely? Not, of course.

In order to support RTF completely, one needs to create 100% MS Word clone,

because RTF specifications were designed for MS Word, and each new RTF

specification corresponds to new version of Word.

It supports a reasonable subset of RTF allowing to save/load TRichView

documents to RTF in the best possible way, + some additional keywords

typical for richedit and MS Word documents.

Unknown RTF keywords are ignored. Currently, about 340 RTF keywords are

supported. It's much more than in the most of competitors' products.

> 2. It seems to me that RTF is regarded a subset of RVF, so if I would

convert

> a file first from RTF to RVF and then back to RTF, there would be no loss

> of substantial (text/formatting/embedded objects) information. Is that

generally

> true?

RVF and RTF are completely different formats, they cannot be considered as

subsets of each other.

RVF is useful as internal formats, it allows to store TRichView documents

without data loss.

If you save TRichView to RVF and then load it, you get exactly the same

document (it depends on some property values, though).

If you save TRichView document in RTF, you may lose some formatting (some

text/paragraph/attributes, image formats).

If the initial RTF were created by TRichView, conversion RTF->RVF->RTF

should create RTF file (almost) exactly like the original one. If it was

created by other word processor, it may be not true.