Re: Appleworks.
Re: Appleworks.
- Subject: Re: Appleworks.
- From: Paul Berkowitz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:45:07 -0700
On 10/20/04 12:34 AM, "Mr Tea" <email@hidden> wrote:
> This from Bruce Robertson - dated 19/10/04 9·21 pm:
>
>> Hm, what is the point of this? If it's still a text document it's still a
>> text document. You could just change the creator code if that's all you want
>> to do.
>
> ... and this from Malcolm Fitzgerald - dated 20/10/04 1·01 am:
>
>> However, if you are saving as text you hardly need to bother with
>> Appleworks. You may use standard additions to read and write text files.
>
> Well now, if Ruby needs to use Appleworks, then let it be. I know it's not
> very fashionable at the moment, but it's been around (and scriptable) for a
> long time. Perhaps it's part of an established workflow. Perhaps the
> original poster already has a bunch of scripts that do stuff with the
> contents of an AppleWorks document and doesn't need the heartache of trying
> to re-write them for TextEdit.
>
> Let's be helpful here, rather than judgemental.
So why isn't the suggestion to change the creator code helpful, Nick? That
will keep it as a text file belonging to AppleWorks - which seemed to be the
point of the request, no?
--
Paul Berkowitz
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden