e-Book Tools - a Word add-in

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

The add-in is created with VS2010. Therefore it requires the VSTO2010 runtime (as specified). It can not operate with VSTO v3, which is delivered by VS2008 unfortunatly. That is causing this error.
If you would install the VSTO2010 runtime, it should work fine. As far as I know, installing the runtime will not cause a conflict with VS2008.

Excellent - OK now.

Missed the sentence re 2010 VS-RT being a pre-req. Suggest it be put up top immediately before/after the Download link. Or move the Download link down so it's after the 'chrome says its a virus' para's.

Until this week I've only noticed your add-on promoted as an alternative to calibre conversion. I've never had a problem with calibre conversions, probably because a) my documents are simple, b) I know what to do and not do in Word and c) I don't suffer OCD regarding the 'code'.

It's as a result of a casual comment from Tex2002ans in the calibre spell checker thread in which he mentioned its S&R features, that I decided to take a look... and now I see there's other goodies too...

BR

[Tex2002ans]

So I thought of another potential enhancement.

Just as you have the FANTASTIC/thorough tool to check matching left/right quotation marks, it would be nice if this was expanded to also check matching left/right parenthesis and brackets.

I believe the same exact logic could be used (unless I am not thinking straight?).

Originally Posted by BetterRed

It's as a result of a casual comment from Tex2002ans in the calibre spell checker thread in which he mentioned its S&R features, that I decided to take a look... and now I see there's other goodies too...

And lots and lots of other goodies, which will only get better/more powerful!

[Toxaris]

I will take a look at it, in theory it would be possible with much of the same code. I will try to make it into the next release, just like most of your other enhancement requests. If only the temperature would drop here a bit, I would have more energy to program...

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

I will take a look at it, in theory it would be possible with much of the same code. I will try to make it into the next release, just like most of your other enhancement requests.

As usual, if you need any samples, I have tons.

I caught a few mismatching parentheses with the same Regex I used for catching a few missing quotation marks... but after seeing how many quotations that your tool caught that my Regexes missed........ I think your algorithms would be vastly superior.

Originally Posted by Toxaris

If only the temperature would drop here a bit, I would have more energy to program...

You must move into a cave!

[Leonatus]

The best thing you can do at these temperatures is to convert .docx files to epubs - others will do the job!

And the plugin does it incredibly well! For the first time, I used the "dialogue check", and this is reaaally helpful, as the spellcheck in Word doesn't recognise errors in this area. My problem: The dialogue check also shows error messages in realation to - hm, don't know the word in english - " ' "-signs. It might be called single quotation marks, and that's it. Just as in english, it is in german frequently used not as quotation mark, but as symbol for letting out a character, especially an "e" (for example: "geht's" for "geht es"). Is it possible to eliminate the warnings for those cases?

Ah, and is it possible to check an option for editing the created ebook either in Sigil or in the Calibre Editor? - Thanks a lot!

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by Leonatus

The best thing you can do at these temperatures is to convert .docx files to epubs - others will do the job!

And the plugin does it incredibly well! For the first time, I used the "dialogue check", and this is reaaally helpful, as the spellcheck in Word doesn't recognise errors in this area. My problem: The dialogue check also shows error messages in realation to - hm, don't know the word in english - " ' "-signs. It might be called single quotation marks, and that's it. Just as in english, it is in german frequently used not as quotation mark, but as symbol for letting out a character, especially an "e" (for example: "geht's" for "geht es"). Is it possible to eliminate the warnings for those cases?

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You get false positives for apostrophes? Hmm, the first step would actually be changing all the apostrophes (as far as can be identified) to a code (in this case <>). It should also work for things like "geht's", which should be "geht<>s" during the run of the procedure. That being said, as long as you don't use a straight quote. If I misunderstand, please let me know and PM me some examples. I will test run them and see what goes wrong there.

Originally Posted by Leonatus

Ah, and is it possible to check an option for editing the created ebook either in Sigil or in the Calibre Editor? - Thanks a lot!

That option is already there. In the settings on the ePUB page you can select if you want to use DOCTYPE or not. You can also set there the program you want to open the ePUB after creation.

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

As usual, if you need any samples, I have tons.

I caught a few mismatching parentheses with the same Regex I used for catching a few missing quotation marks... but after seeing how many quotations that your tool caught that my Regexes missed........ I think your algorithms would be vastly superior.

Done, in the next version you can choose to also check for parenthesis, brackets, braces and chevrons. Of course these can be chosen individually.

No idea when the next version will be ready though...

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

Done, in the next version you can choose to also check for parenthesis, brackets, braces and chevrons. Of course these can be chosen individually.

No idea when the next version will be ready though...

Amazing, can't wait to test it on further projects.

I also thought of another idea:

When running the Check Dialogue procedure, the highlight would show you the effected area. I would push the manual fix button.

I would copy/paste + look in the source/Sigil/doing some other fixes, then I would open up Word again, and the highlighting would be gone. This made it tough to spot the exact location where the error was.

Perhaps when doing manual correction, you can put in some temporary color highlights in the effected area (For example, a neon yellow/green background behind the words)?

Of course, when you go "Back to the procedure", just remove the highlights.

[Toxaris]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

When running the Check Dialogue procedure, the highlight would show you the effected area. I would push the manual fix button.

I would copy/paste + look in the source/Sigil/doing some other fixes, then I would open up Word again, and the highlighting would be gone. This made it tough to spot the exact location where the error was.

Perhaps when doing manual correction, you can put in some temporary color highlights in the effected area (For example, a neon yellow/green background behind the words)?

Of course, when you go "Back to the procedure", just remove the highlights.

It is not that simple. As soon as you temporary leave the procedure, the procedure has no recollection of what was selected. It will pick it up again where you put the cursor. So, making it another color is doable, but reversing this is difficult since the procedure would not know what to change back.
I will take a look, but I do not think this will be implemented.

[owly]

Hi, I tried downloading and Chrome thinks your zipfiles are malware, I tried both the English and the Dutch version. I was able to download via Explorer though, I can see that it's really developed :-)

[Toxaris]

Actually the only difference in the Dutch and the English version is the language of the installer...
Chrome is really irritating in this. There is no way for me to report to Google that it is fine or to tell them to check. I only can let them check the website and that one is fine. You are given the impression that you can contact Google, but that is not true.

[Leonatus]

Originally Posted by Toxaris

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You get false positives for apostrophes? Hmm, the first step would actually be changing all the apostrophes (as far as can be identified) to a code (in this case <>). It should also work for things like "geht's", which should be "geht<>s" during the run of the procedure. That being said, as long as you don't use a straight quote. If I misunderstand, please let me know and PM me some examples. I will test run them and see what goes wrong there..

Ah, it has been the <>. The plugin places them automatically, and in my worries, I had replaced them again by " ' ". So, my mistake, sorry!

That option is already there. In the settings on the ePUB page you can select if you want to use DOCTYPE or not. You can also set there the program you want to open the ePUB after creation.

I didn't know this. Thank you, and fine weekend!

[Toxaris]

New version almost ready for publication. Besides the earlier mention of also being able to check if the various brackets have complete sets (opening and closing), there are some other things in this version (besides some other fixes, updates and new things).
New is the option to import an ePUB2 into Word. There are some restrictions though, but they should not be a real big issue in most cases.
Another new option is to have an ignore list for a search/replace action. I think I can explain it best with an example. Let say you have a text in which the family MacGregor plays a big part. In one of the S/R action you check for a capital in a word. Usually these are OCR mistakes (I instead of l and others). Usually that means a lot of hits, due to the G in MacGregor. In this update you can ignore a specific hit. So, you tell to ignore MacGregor, but it will still find MacEwan (again just an example). This can speed things up a lot in some cases.

I want to do some more testing, so release in probably two weeks.

[Toxaris]

It took a bit longer than I wanted, but I just kept tinkering to make it better and to remove small annoyances (for me at least).

The changelist is here.

Besides updates and fixes, some of the new features are:
- Alternative spelling checker
- Ability to open ePUB2 files (with some restrictions!)
- Selective ignore during a S&R activity in the procedure
- Inserted symbols or characters from symbol font are handled correctly (converted to their unicode equivalent)

Direct download link.

For new users, don't forget to retrieve the initial replacement rules file from my site!

[BetterRed]

I really like this new version, for various reasons I didn't like the previous version.

In the dialogue checker I get 12 popups (see attachment) on a clean document, are they really necessary, I find them... distracting

BR