Below is a screenshot of Composition Mode. When I hover the mouse over the Typewriter, presumably for Typewriter Scrolling, I get the same screen tip as the one to the right, for Showing/Hiding Keyword Panel.

Thanks,

Statistics: Posted by georgeyates — Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:06 am

]]>

JohnnyZMusic wrote:

Will this convert and import multiple Pages documents?

Will this convert and import multiple Pages documents?

No. Apple has not published the Pages format, making it difficult to write converters for it.

We recommend using Word as the exchange format between Pages and Scrivener.

Katherine

Statistics: Posted by kewms — Fri Aug 02, 2019 9:18 pm

]]>

]]>

KB wrote:

I don't really see how this would be very feasible, I'm afraid (it requires a Pandoc install for a start, and involves mixing up different types of export). MathType equations contain MathML, but there's no easy way of converting MathML to the OMML that Docx files use.

All the best,

Keith

I don't really see how this would be very feasible, I'm afraid (it requires a Pandoc install for a start, and involves mixing up different types of export). MathType equations contain MathML, but there's no easy way of converting MathML to the OMML that Docx files use.

All the best,

Keith

Thanks very much for the reply. I have now decided to write the book in Scrivener with AmberV's LaTeX template and compile to LaTeX, bypassing Word entirely. That seems like the best way forward.

Statistics: Posted by jpkell — Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:05 pm

]]>

Herewith a zip file with 3 documents:

"Recent Work" is a short document created using Word for Mac 2011, with a few footnotes and embedded (by copy/paste) spreadsheet and chart. This imports perfectly with the new converters.

"RP paper extract" is a few pages from a collaboratively authored academic paper, with footnotes and embedded graphics, substantially drafted by my colleague using Word for Windows. The footnotes and graphics do not import with the new converter but are OK using the Aspose converter.

All best

Ray

Statistics: Posted by rayl — Sat Jul 20, 2019 9:25 pm

]]>

Keith

Statistics: Posted by KB — Sat Jul 20, 2019 5:36 pm

]]>

Embedded graphics objects - mostly tables and graphs pasted from Excel into Word- are not imported using the new converter, but are imported using the Aspose converter. This applies to all three files.

Footnotes are imported using the new converter for just one of the three .docx files.

Each file is the result of a collaboration, so some parts were originally drafted in Scrivener, but subsequently edited, including inserting the graphics objects, in Word for Mac and Word for Windows.

All best

Ray

Statistics: Posted by rayl — Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:18 pm

]]>

However, footnotes written in Scrivener and exported using the new converters seem to be fine.

(Using Scrivener 3.1.3 on macOS 10.14.5)

Ray

Statistics: Posted by rayl — Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:30 pm

]]>

https://www.literatureandlatte.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=57603

gr

Statistics: Posted by gr — Fri Jul 05, 2019 12:44 pm

]]>

KB wrote:

Works fine for me. I downloaded and exported your project using my converters in 3.1.3, and I see the exact outline from your screenshot. I've attached the exported Word file.

Works fine for me. I downloaded and exported your project using my converters in 3.1.3, and I see the exact outline from your screenshot. I've attached the exported Word file.

Hi KB, my screenshot in

Here is the Outline in Scrivener:

Here is a screenshot of what it is

Statistics: Posted by nontroppo — Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:22 am

]]>

jpkell wrote:

Hi Keith,

I am a longtime Scrivener user, who is now writing a scholarly book with it. The book has many equations and symbols, for which I used MathType integrated with Scrivener. But I have encountered a huge problem that I think your new converters could help with (and from reading the forums, I'm not the only one who could use this).

When one's manuscript contains equations and symbols, it turns out that publishers want either a LaTex document or a Word document with equations and symbols editable with Word's Equation Editor. But when one compiles a Scrivener document that includes MathType equations and symbols to docx, the equations and symbols become images that are not editable with Equation Editor.

After spending a day yesterday trying to figure out a workaround, the best I can think of is to (re)write the book in Markdown with Scrivener, inserting where necessary the LaTex equation/symbol code that I can copy from MathType. I confirmed that I can use pandoc to convert a markdown file containing LaTex equation code to a docx file containing an equation that is editable in Word's Equation Editor. So I know it's possible to convert the LaTex equation syntax to Word's Equation Editor. What would be AMAZING-AND-I-WOULD-BE-FOREVER-GRATEFUL is if I could write in Scrivener as usual, with all of Scrivener's usual rich text, but instead of inserting MathType equations as images, I would insert them as LaTex code, and then your tools would use Pandoc (or equivalent) to render the equations as editable with Equation Editor when compiling to docx from within Scrivener.

Is there *any chance* at all this could be included in your new docx converter tools?? Thanks!

Hi Keith,

I am a longtime Scrivener user, who is now writing a scholarly book with it. The book has many equations and symbols, for which I used MathType integrated with Scrivener. But I have encountered a huge problem that I think your new converters could help with (and from reading the forums, I'm not the only one who could use this).

When one's manuscript contains equations and symbols, it turns out that publishers want either a LaTex document or a Word document with equations and symbols editable with Word's Equation Editor. But when one compiles a Scrivener document that includes MathType equations and symbols to docx, the equations and symbols become images that are not editable with Equation Editor.

After spending a day yesterday trying to figure out a workaround, the best I can think of is to (re)write the book in Markdown with Scrivener, inserting where necessary the LaTex equation/symbol code that I can copy from MathType. I confirmed that I can use pandoc to convert a markdown file containing LaTex equation code to a docx file containing an equation that is editable in Word's Equation Editor. So I know it's possible to convert the LaTex equation syntax to Word's Equation Editor. What would be AMAZING-AND-I-WOULD-BE-FOREVER-GRATEFUL is if I could write in Scrivener as usual, with all of Scrivener's usual rich text, but instead of inserting MathType equations as images, I would insert them as LaTex code, and then your tools would use Pandoc (or equivalent) to render the equations as editable with Equation Editor when compiling to docx from within Scrivener.

Is there *any chance* at all this could be included in your new docx converter tools?? Thanks!

I don't really see how this would be very feasible, I'm afraid (it requires a Pandoc install for a start, and involves mixing up different types of export). MathType equations contain MathML, but there's no easy way of converting MathML to the OMML that Docx files use.

All the best,

Keith

Statistics: Posted by KB — Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:19 pm

]]>

nontroppo wrote:

FYI: the Heading 1 export bug detailed in the previous post persists in V3.1.3…

FYI: the Heading 1 export bug detailed in the previous post persists in V3.1.3…

Works fine for me. I downloaded and exported your project using my converters in 3.1.3, and I see the exact outline from your screenshot. I've attached the exported Word file.

- Heading Test.zip

Statistics: Posted by KB — Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:12 pm

]]>

]]>

With the Aspose converter, I get a full outline with Headings 1–3 (as in the screenshot in that post). But with the new converter only the first "Heading 1" Part is exported, the other parts are just "Normal" styles, thus no outlines:

Statistics: Posted by nontroppo — Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:55 am

]]>

]]>

]]>

Statistics: Posted by rdale — Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:25 pm

]]>

I read somewhere that Scrivener 3 for Mac is supposed to export to vellum, but I can't see this on the list to export. So I had to save as a Docx then load it into vellum. Is there a way to export straight from Scrivener or did I just make the whole thing up?

thanx

Loretta

Statistics: Posted by Loretta Green — Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:23 am

]]>

]]>

]]>

I am a longtime Scrivener user, who is now writing a scholarly book with it. The book has many equations and symbols, for which I used MathType integrated with Scrivener. But I have encountered a huge problem that I think your new converters could help with (and from reading the forums, I'm not the only one who could use this).

When one's manuscript contains equations and symbols, it turns out that publishers want either a LaTex document or a Word document with equations and symbols editable with Word's Equation Editor. But when one compiles a Scrivener document that includes MathType equations and symbols to docx, the equations and symbols become images that are not editable with Equation Editor.

After spending a day yesterday trying to figure out a workaround, the best I can think of is to (re)write the book in Markdown with Scrivener, inserting where necessary the LaTex equation/symbol code that I can copy from MathType. I confirmed that I can use pandoc to convert a markdown file containing LaTex equation code to a docx file containing an equation that is editable in Word's Equation Editor. So I know it's possible to convert the LaTex equation syntax to Word's Equation Editor. What would be AMAZING-AND-I-WOULD-BE-FOREVER-GRATEFUL is if I could write in Scrivener as usual, with all of Scrivener's usual rich text, but instead of inserting MathType equations as images, I would insert them as LaTex code, and then your tools would use Pandoc (or equivalent) to render the equations as editable with Equation Editor when compiling to docx from within Scrivener.

Is there *any chance* at all this could be included in your new docx converter tools?? Thanks!

Statistics: Posted by jpkell — Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:42 pm

]]>

fpramme wrote:

I run the beta version of macOS Catalina and want you to ask, if there is a beta version of scrivener itself that runs on that os?

From that point scrivener doesn't work on the new os. This is nothing special because its a beta but it would be nice to know if there is a known workaround or even a beta version that fix the problem.

thanks

Florian

I run the beta version of macOS Catalina and want you to ask, if there is a beta version of scrivener itself that runs on that os?

From that point scrivener doesn't work on the new os. This is nothing special because its a beta but it would be nice to know if there is a known workaround or even a beta version that fix the problem.

thanks

Florian

See my response to this post: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=57310

You should not expect to see Catalina-specific updates until quite a bit closer to the release date.

Katherine

Statistics: Posted by kewms — Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:09 pm

]]>

https://scrivener.tenderapp.com/help/kb ... references

Slàinte mhòr.

Statistics: Posted by JoRo — Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:37 pm

]]>

From that point scrivener doesn't work on the new os. This is nothing special because its a beta but it would be nice to know if there is a known workaround or even a beta version that fix the problem.

thanks

Florian

Statistics: Posted by fpramme — Tue Jun 04, 2019 2:56 pm

]]>

nontroppo wrote:

OK makes sense! Exiftool doesn't show what the JPEG compression is either, and what I gleaned online is this is not part of the JFIF spec to store this info at all. It probably doesn't matter too much anyway as JPEG is lossy, so whenever a 75% JPEG is saved again at 75%, it will always gradually become worse AFAIK.

OK makes sense! Exiftool doesn't show what the JPEG compression is either, and what I gleaned online is this is not part of the JFIF spec to store this info at all. It probably doesn't matter too much anyway as JPEG is lossy, so whenever a 75% JPEG is saved again at 75%, it will always gradually become worse AFAIK.

That's a good point. What's frustrating, though, is that if you save freshly-created JPG data in Cocoa with no compression, it ends up bigger - a 60kb file altered only to have its dpi changed becomes 120kb. Otherwise I could save without compression, but as it is I have to put an option in the Preferences.

Statistics: Posted by KB — Thu May 09, 2019 1:14 pm

]]>