Exporting for word processors

Exporting for word processors

[Jeffrey Windsor]

I've tried searching around, and can't find an answer to this: I only
come here as a last resort.

I'm a PhD candidate in English literature, trying to break free from
the crappy tools that proliferate among humanists. My advisor and
committee are all incorrigible Microsoft Word users -- there's no
chance that they'll ever switch. I'd rather use emacs, and
specifically org, for my dissertation. But I need to regularly send
drafts to my committee.

In the past, I've used PDFs (created in org via LaTeX), which works
fine from my perspective, but I've detected some grumbling from the
Microsoft Word users. They want me to fit in with the rest of the
crowd and send them Word docs, too.

Before org, I used MultiMarkdown, which exports to RTF. Since
discovering the more robust org-mode, I've wished I could do the same.
The fact is, I probably *can* do the same, but simply lack the
know-how.

Can anyone help me out? I suspect that docbook is the key, but I've
tried to find an answer there and am flummoxed by the docbook
documentation. Plus, if possible I'd like to have this be a simple
process: if possible I'd like to have a straightforward C-c C-e R and,
voila!, an RTF (or wordml?) file appears on my desktop. I'm a Mac
(aquamacs emacs) user running org 6.26trans, if that makes any
difference.

Can anyone lead me, guide me, show me the way to export an RTF (or
equiv) from a working org file? Or is there a better solution I'm
overlooking?

--jw

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Matthew Lundin]

Hi Jeffrey,

Jeffrey Windsor <windsor.10@osu.edu> writes:

> I'm a PhD candidate in English literature, trying to break free from
> the crappy tools that proliferate among humanists. My advisor and
> committee are all incorrigible Microsoft Word users -- there's no
> chance that they'll ever switch. I'd rather use emacs, and
> specifically org, for my dissertation. But I need to regularly send
> drafts to my committee.

I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/biblatex
in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the things I
write have to be converted to doc format at some point.

> In the past, I've used PDFs (created in org via LaTeX), which works
> fine from my perspective, but I've detected some grumbling from the
> Microsoft Word users. They want me to fit in with the rest of the
> crowd and send them Word docs, too.

Are they adding comments to the Word document, or are they simply
printing it out for reading? If the latter is the case, then this might
be an opportunity to inform them (gently) about the advantages of pdf
files for exchanging documents. :)

> Before org, I used MultiMarkdown, which exports to RTF. Since
> discovering the more robust org-mode, I've wished I could do the same.
> The fact is, I probably *can* do the same, but simply lack the
> know-how.

Perhaps the easiest route would be to export to html and then save as a
doc file from within Open Office or Word.

For simple LaTeX export to rtf (i.e., export of tex files exported from
org-mode), I've had great success with latex2rtf:

http://latex2rtf.sourceforge.net/

It's as simple as typing:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
latex2rtf document.tex
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

It will spit out a few warnings about unknown packages, but the
resulting rtf file is usually quite good.

> Can anyone help me out? I suspect that docbook is the key, but I've
> tried to find an answer there and am flummoxed by the docbook
> documentation. Plus, if possible I'd like to have this be a simple
> process: if possible I'd like to have a straightforward C-c C-e R and,
> voila!, an RTF (or wordml?) file appears on my desktop. I'm a Mac
> (aquamacs emacs) user running org 6.26trans, if that makes any
> difference.

I think it would be pretty easy to write a function combines
org-export-as-latex with latex2rtf to deposit an rtf on the desktop.
I'll see what I can come up with.

For more complicated stuff (e.g., if you use the excellent biblatex
package for managing citations), tex4ht is a nice option:

http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~gurari/TeX4ht/

This is a very powerful export tool that will convert a tex file to a
variety of formats. It can handle a lot of extra tex packages (e.g.,
biblatex) that other exporters can't handle.

Hope this helps.

Matt

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Scot Becker]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4695 bytes --]

I'm doing something similar.  Also in the humanities, and also the lone
non-Word user in my department (also with biblatex).

In my case, no one minds what tools I use, so I'm lucky.  I'm using org >
latex >PDF and pass those on to my supervisor.

I hope that you find something that works.  Conversion seems to always have
a few niggles, which makes me think that conversion on an ongoing basis may
have some rough spots.  I expect that if you use HTML as an intermediary
format, you won't have the footnotes where you want them.  And LaTeX just
seems to think differently from Word, which means that things don't come out
how you want them.

If your committee is happy to pay attention to content, and not worry about
exactly how things look until the end, it should be fine.  If they care
about how things look, you might persuade them that a nicely done LaTeX PDF
is the thing.

Also it's worth noting that the org-mode exporter does have a few quirks,
which I just managed to figure out.  You can't end italics *after* a comma
(you have to do it before), and you can't mix bold and italics unless you
specify explicit LaTeX markup for one of them.  And bold or italics and
quote marks also have problems, which I haven't wholly sorted out.  But if
you go with LaTeX, you can get away with a lot just by passing LaTeX
commands through.

All the best,

Scot


On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:

> Hi Jeffrey,
>
> Jeffrey Windsor <windsor.10@osu.edu> writes:
>
> > I'm a PhD candidate in English literature, trying to break free from
> > the crappy tools that proliferate among humanists. My advisor and
> > committee are all incorrigible Microsoft Word users -- there's no
> > chance that they'll ever switch. I'd rather use emacs, and
> > specifically org, for my dissertation. But I need to regularly send
> > drafts to my committee.
>
> I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/biblatex
> in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the things I
> write have to be converted to doc format at some point.
>
> > In the past, I've used PDFs (created in org via LaTeX), which works
> > fine from my perspective, but I've detected some grumbling from the
> > Microsoft Word users. They want me to fit in with the rest of the
> > crowd and send them Word docs, too.
>
> Are they adding comments to the Word document, or are they simply
> printing it out for reading? If the latter is the case, then this might
> be an opportunity to inform them (gently) about the advantages of pdf
> files for exchanging documents. :)
>
> > Before org, I used MultiMarkdown, which exports to RTF. Since
> > discovering the more robust org-mode, I've wished I could do the same.
> > The fact is, I probably *can* do the same, but simply lack the
> > know-how.
>
> Perhaps the easiest route would be to export to html and then save as a
> doc file from within Open Office or Word.
>
> For simple LaTeX export to rtf (i.e., export of tex files exported from
> org-mode), I've had great success with latex2rtf:
>
> http://latex2rtf.sourceforge.net/
>
> It's as simple as typing:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> latex2rtf document.tex
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> It will spit out a few warnings about unknown packages, but the
> resulting rtf file is usually quite good.
>
> > Can anyone help me out? I suspect that docbook is the key, but I've
> > tried to find an answer there and am flummoxed by the docbook
> > documentation. Plus, if possible I'd like to have this be a simple
> > process: if possible I'd like to have a straightforward C-c C-e R and,
> > voila!, an RTF (or wordml?) file appears on my desktop. I'm a Mac
> > (aquamacs emacs) user running org 6.26trans, if that makes any
> > difference.
>
> I think it would be pretty easy to write a function combines
> org-export-as-latex with latex2rtf to deposit an rtf on the desktop.
> I'll see what I can come up with.
>
> For more complicated stuff (e.g., if you use the excellent biblatex
> package for managing citations), tex4ht is a nice option:
>
> http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~gurari/TeX4ht/<http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/%7Egurari/TeX4ht/>
>
> This is a very powerful export tool that will convert a tex file to a
> variety of formats. It can handle a lot of extra tex packages (e.g.,
> biblatex) that other exporters can't handle.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Matt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5834 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Carsten Dominik]

On May 9, 2009, at 1:04 AM, Scot Becker wrote:

> I'm doing something similar.  Also in the humanities, and also the  
> lone non-Word user in my department (also with biblatex).
>
> In my case, no one minds what tools I use, so I'm lucky.  I'm using  
> org > latex >PDF and pass those on to my supervisor.
>
> I hope that you find something that works.  Conversion seems to  
> always have a few niggles, which makes me think that conversion on  
> an ongoing basis may have some rough spots.  I expect that if you  
> use HTML as an intermediary format, you won't have the footnotes  
> where you want them.  And LaTeX just seems to think differently from  
> Word, which means that things don't come out how you want them.
>
> If your committee is happy to pay attention to content, and not  
> worry about exactly how things look until the end, it should be  
> fine.  If they care about how things look, you might persuade them  
> that a nicely done LaTeX PDF is the thing.
>
> Also it's worth noting that the org-mode exporter does have a few  
> quirks, which I just managed to figure out.  You can't end italics  
> *after* a comma (you have to do it before),

Hmmm, you could try to change this by customizing org-emphasis-regexp- 
components.
the third string lists the characters forbidden as first and last  
characters in an emphasis region.  The comma is listed here, but I  
don't remember exactly why.  There probably was a reason in an example  
posted by someone.  But it might be relatively safe to remove the  
comma from this list.  Same for single and double quotes.

This stuff is really hard to get right for everyone, which
is why this variable exists to make your own rules.

- Carsten

> and you can't mix bold and italics unless you specify explicit LaTeX  
> markup for one of them.  And bold or italics and quote marks also  
> have problems, which I haven't wholly sorted out.  But if you go  
> with LaTeX, you can get away with a lot just by passing LaTeX  
> commands through.
>
> All the best,
>
> Scot
>
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org>  
> wrote:
> Hi Jeffrey,
>
> Jeffrey Windsor <windsor.10@osu.edu> writes:
>
> > I'm a PhD candidate in English literature, trying to break free from
> > the crappy tools that proliferate among humanists. My advisor and
> > committee are all incorrigible Microsoft Word users -- there's no
> > chance that they'll ever switch. I'd rather use emacs, and
> > specifically org, for my dissertation. But I need to regularly send
> > drafts to my committee.
>
> I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/ 
> biblatex
> in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the  
> things I
> write have to be converted to doc format at some point.
>
> > In the past, I've used PDFs (created in org via LaTeX), which works
> > fine from my perspective, but I've detected some grumbling from the
> > Microsoft Word users. They want me to fit in with the rest of the
> > crowd and send them Word docs, too.
>
> Are they adding comments to the Word document, or are they simply
> printing it out for reading? If the latter is the case, then this  
> might
> be an opportunity to inform them (gently) about the advantages of pdf
> files for exchanging documents. :)
>
> > Before org, I used MultiMarkdown, which exports to RTF. Since
> > discovering the more robust org-mode, I've wished I could do the  
> same.
> > The fact is, I probably *can* do the same, but simply lack the
> > know-how.
>
> Perhaps the easiest route would be to export to html and then save  
> as a
> doc file from within Open Office or Word.
>
> For simple LaTeX export to rtf (i.e., export of tex files exported  
> from
> org-mode), I've had great success with latex2rtf:
>
> http://latex2rtf.sourceforge.net/
>
> It's as simple as typing:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> latex2rtf document.tex
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> It will spit out a few warnings about unknown packages, but the
> resulting rtf file is usually quite good.
>
> > Can anyone help me out? I suspect that docbook is the key, but I've
> > tried to find an answer there and am flummoxed by the docbook
> > documentation. Plus, if possible I'd like to have this be a simple
> > process: if possible I'd like to have a straightforward C-c C-e R  
> and,
> > voila!, an RTF (or wordml?) file appears on my desktop. I'm a Mac
> > (aquamacs emacs) user running org 6.26trans, if that makes any
> > difference.
>
> I think it would be pretty easy to write a function combines
> org-export-as-latex with latex2rtf to deposit an rtf on the desktop.
> I'll see what I can come up with.
>
> For more complicated stuff (e.g., if you use the excellent biblatex
> package for managing citations), tex4ht is a nice option:
>
> http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~gurari/TeX4ht/
>
> This is a very powerful export tool that will convert a tex file to a
> variety of formats. It can handle a lot of extra tex packages (e.g.,
> biblatex) that other exporters can't handle.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Matt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Sebastian Titz]

Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:

> I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/biblatex
> in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the things I
> write have to be converted to doc format at some point.

Hi Matthew,

could you elaborate on how you use biblatex with org-mode and auctex,
since auctex doesn't support biblatex?

Ciao

Sebastian

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Matthew Lundin]

Hi Sebastian,

Sebastian Titz <sebastian.titz@gmail.com> writes:

> Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:
>
>> I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/biblatex
>> in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the things I
>> write have to be converted to doc format at some point.

> could you elaborate on how you use biblatex with org-mode and auctex,
> since auctex doesn't support biblatex?

I'll try to keep this brief, since I don't want to talk too much about
AUCTeX in the org-mode forum. 

I've found that AUCTeX and RefTeX work very well with biblatex, since
all biblatex requires is to run latex, then bibtex, then latex again.

I use the Chicago Manual of Style biblatex package:

http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/exptl/biblatex-contrib/biblatex-chicago-notes-df/

To make this work with AUCTeX, I've created a custom reftex-cite-format
for the citation types I use most often:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(setq reftex-cite-format
      '(
	(?c . "\\cite[]{%l}")
	(?C . "\\cites[]{%l}")
	(?t . "\\citetitle[]{%l}")
	(?T . "\\citetitles[]{%l}")
	(?a . "\\autocite[]{%l}")
	(?A . "\\autocites[]{%l}")
	(?h . "\\headlessfullcite[]{%l}")
	(?x . "[]{%l}")
	(?X . "{%l}")
	))

(setq reftex-cite-prompt-optional-args t)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

I've also set the following variable to get the appropriate faces:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(setq font-latex-match-reference-keywords
      '(("cites" "[{") 
	("autocite" "[{") 
	("autocites" "[{") 
	("citetitle" "[{") 
	("citetitles" "[{") 
	("headlessfullcite" "[{")))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Finally, I've had to hack at a couple of reftex functions to change the
regular expressions that are used to identify citation macros for:

   1) jumping to the matching entry in the bib file
      (reftex-view-crossref)

   2) generating a bib file from a tex file
      (reftex-all-used-citation-keys). 

        - This is necessary because the current regexps don't recognize
          the plural citation macros (e.g. \cites, \autocites, etc.).

Unfortunately, these regexps are hardcoded into reftex, so I have to
load the rewritten functions via a reftex-mode-hook. And since Carsten
is no longer the maintainer of RefTeX, it's not quite as easy to get a
customize option for a RefTeX regexp as it is to get one in org-mode. :)

The whole setup is by no means perfect, but it works fine for me.

Now, for the org-mode part of the post. I generally use org-mode for
drafting and AUCTeX for revising/polishing and adding formal citations.

If I plan exporting something quickly from org-mode, I use the following
function for a quick and dirty way to get citation info from my bib
files into my org-mode files. (And, of course, I make heavy use of
org-mode's wonderful footnote features.)

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(defun my-reftex-citations ()
  (interactive)
  (let ((reftex-cite-format 
	 '(
	   (?f . "%a. %t. %j, %v, %b. %r: %u, %y. %p.\n")
	   (?F . "<<%l>>\n\n%a. %t. %j, %v, %b. %r: %u, %y. %p.\n") 
	   (?s . "%a, %t, %y\n") 
           (?c . "\\cite[]{%l}"
	   (?l . "[[%l]]\n")
	   (?L . "%a, %t, %y. [[%l]]\n"))))
    (reftex-citation)))

(define-key text-mode-map (kbd "C-c y") 'my-reftex-citations)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

If I wanted to export for biblatex directly from org-mode (which I
haven't tried yet), I think I would ignore most of the special
biblatex/Chicago macros and just use the \cite macro inside of footnotes
to make conversion/export to other formats a bit easier.

Hope this helps.

Matt

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Scot Becker]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5378 bytes --]

@Carsten.

Thanks for pointing that variable out.  I'll experiment.  I was encouraged
by the fact that even when italics didn't work the way I wanted, the
/slashes/ were always still intact.  I figured if I got desperate, I could
always do a second pass on an export hook, but I'll mess with the variable.
How nice that it's flexible.

@ Matthew:

Thanks for your setup.  I'll be glad to poke around with it.

@ Sebastian:

Matthew's setup is considerably more refined than mine, but so far I've had
good sucess with ebib, another BibTeX manager for Emacs.  It lets you
customize a few citation commands and makes it very easy to snag a quick
citation key while writing.  So far I write in org-mode and try to arrange
it so I never have to look at the LaTeX file.  But mine is a thesis, and
it's not to the final stages yet.  At the moment I still run
(xe)latex-bibtex-(xe)latex manually, but that's only because I haven't sat
down to customize the org variable to customize the latex command and run
bibtex.

Scot




On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:

> Hi Sebastian,
>
> Sebastian Titz <sebastian.titz@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I am in the same position --- i.e., I use emacs/auctex/org-mode/biblatex
> >> in a field in which MS Word is the default option. Many of the things I
> >> write have to be converted to doc format at some point.
>
> > could you elaborate on how you use biblatex with org-mode and auctex,
> > since auctex doesn't support biblatex?
>
> I'll try to keep this brief, since I don't want to talk too much about
> AUCTeX in the org-mode forum.
>
> I've found that AUCTeX and RefTeX work very well with biblatex, since
> all biblatex requires is to run latex, then bibtex, then latex again.
>
> I use the Chicago Manual of Style biblatex package:
>
>
> http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/exptl/biblatex-contrib/biblatex-chicago-notes-df/
>
> To make this work with AUCTeX, I've created a custom reftex-cite-format
> for the citation types I use most often:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (setq reftex-cite-format
>      '(
>        (?c . "\\cite[]{%l}")
>        (?C . "\\cites[]{%l}")
>        (?t . "\\citetitle[]{%l}")
>        (?T . "\\citetitles[]{%l}")
>        (?a . "\\autocite[]{%l}")
>        (?A . "\\autocites[]{%l}")
>        (?h . "\\headlessfullcite[]{%l}")
>        (?x . "[]{%l}")
>        (?X . "{%l}")
>        ))
>
> (setq reftex-cite-prompt-optional-args t)
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> I've also set the following variable to get the appropriate faces:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (setq font-latex-match-reference-keywords
>      '(("cites" "[{")
>        ("autocite" "[{")
>        ("autocites" "[{")
>        ("citetitle" "[{")
>        ("citetitles" "[{")
>        ("headlessfullcite" "[{")))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> Finally, I've had to hack at a couple of reftex functions to change the
> regular expressions that are used to identify citation macros for:
>
>   1) jumping to the matching entry in the bib file
>      (reftex-view-crossref)
>
>   2) generating a bib file from a tex file
>      (reftex-all-used-citation-keys).
>
>        - This is necessary because the current regexps don't recognize
>          the plural citation macros (e.g. \cites, \autocites, etc.).
>
> Unfortunately, these regexps are hardcoded into reftex, so I have to
> load the rewritten functions via a reftex-mode-hook. And since Carsten
> is no longer the maintainer of RefTeX, it's not quite as easy to get a
> customize option for a RefTeX regexp as it is to get one in org-mode. :)
>
> The whole setup is by no means perfect, but it works fine for me.
>
> Now, for the org-mode part of the post. I generally use org-mode for
> drafting and AUCTeX for revising/polishing and adding formal citations.
>
> If I plan exporting something quickly from org-mode, I use the following
> function for a quick and dirty way to get citation info from my bib
> files into my org-mode files. (And, of course, I make heavy use of
> org-mode's wonderful footnote features.)
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (defun my-reftex-citations ()
>  (interactive)
>  (let ((reftex-cite-format
>         '(
>           (?f . "%a. %t. %j, %v, %b. %r: %u, %y. %p.\n")
>           (?F . "<<%l>>\n\n%a. %t. %j, %v, %b. %r: %u, %y. %p.\n")
>           (?s . "%a, %t, %y\n")
>           (?c . "\\cite[]{%l}"
>           (?l . "[[%l]]\n")
>           (?L . "%a, %t, %y. [[%l]]\n"))))
>    (reftex-citation)))
>
> (define-key text-mode-map (kbd "C-c y") 'my-reftex-citations)
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> If I wanted to export for biblatex directly from org-mode (which I
> haven't tried yet), I think I would ignore most of the special
> biblatex/Chicago macros and just use the \cite macro inside of footnotes
> to make conversion/export to other formats a bit easier.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Matt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7115 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Paul R]

Hi,

Jeffrey> Can anyone help me out? I suspect that docbook is the key, but
Jeffrey> I've tried to find an answer there and am flummoxed by the
Jeffrey> docbook documentation.

Indeed, you can use docbook and something like docbook2odf to convert to
something OpenOffice.org can read. You'll have to experiment, I really
hope this will work well because that's what docbook has been designed
for.

You can also directly write to ODT, I've done such an export filter for
emacs muse some time ago, I can't remember if I published it somewhere,
but basically it is really simple :

 - start OpenOffice and write some dummy text and apply paragraph style
   to them. Make sure you use every type of structure you will need
   later (lists, titles ...).
 - tweak your styles to suit your tastes
 - save file somewhere as template.odt
 - odt is a zipped directory, so unzip the file and look inside, you
   will find something like content.xml, read it carefully, so you will
   know how to write it later.

Now write an exporter that can be customized to use a given
« template.odt » file. It will first unzip this file, then replace
content.xml by a newly generated content.xml from your org file, then
zip back the whole directory and voila.

-- 
  Paul

Re: Exporting for word processors

[Giovanni Ridolfi]

--- Ven 8/5/09, Matthew Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> ha scritto:
> Jeffrey Windsor <windsor.10@osu.edu>
> writes:
> 
> > I'm a PhD candidate in English literature, 
> > My advisor and
> > committee are all incorrigible Microsoft Word users --
> > there's no  chance that they'll ever switch. 
> > But I need to regularly send drafts to my committee.
> 
> Perhaps the easiest route would be to export to html and
> then save as a
> doc file from within Open Office or Word.

agree.

Hi Jeffrey,

I use org to write the first draft of my reports
and I export them as html. 
Then I open the html file with Microsoft Word and do the 
final corrections (numbered lists, section/subsections...)
I have also written a stylesheet like the one boss uses:

* COMMENT  HTML style specifications
#Local Variables:
#truncate-lines:nil
#org-export-html-style: "   ....

However I do not have many citations, and I can't help :-/ 
cheers,

Giovanni