Re: MS Project import/export

Kurt Maute <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.apps.planner.devel
Message-ID <1174227056.32571.34.camel@localhost>
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 12:26 +0300, Victor wrote:
> Hello, Kurt,
> 
> thank you for your response and sorry for my late reply, I was away
> for several weeks,
> please see my comments below.

np - I've been travelling as well.

> [email protected] wrote:
> > 
> > One reason why I didn't pursue this further was the MS announcement that it was going to move toward xml format as their native file format for MS Office - my presumption was that the same would follow for Project (anyone know if any of this has come to pass yet?).
> >   
> Seems that MPP is still used as native format in MS Project 2007, it
> has been modified in 2007 version according to this link:
> http://kb.wisc.edu/helpdesk/page.php?id=5255
> As for other MS Office products (Word, Excel, PowerPoint) - yes, they
> will use Open XML and, as I know, there is Open XML to/from Open
> Document Format converter.

Yeah, I took a look into it as well and discovered the same.  So I think
you're right to pursue mpp import since native xml format is a ways off
yet (if they do it at all).

> > True - another way to go would be to get the windows version in
> > really good shape and add features so there's no reason for folks on
> > either platform to bother with MS Project at all.
> The problem is that nobody at business-side want to install and learn
> new products like Planner.

'nobody' might be a bit strong - but I see your point


> > There are some other complications, though.  Some of the features of Planner aren't designed the same way as MS Project (for instance, MS Project doesn't have the concept of a day type in their calendar, so import of their calendars don't work), so compatibility will always be a problem unless we turn Planner into an MS Project clone (or offer some sort of 'compatibility mode'.
> > 
> > I personally don't like that idea, since it would forever limit our choices in how (and whether we should) implement new features.
> > 
> > Don't get me wrong - I'm all for offering compatibility tools, so long as we keep our freedom and independence.  We just have to manage people's expectations about the limitations of the import/export features we provide.  Otherwise we'll be stuck in 'it doesn't work like MS' - land.
> >   
> Me too, I don't like the idea to make a "MS Project clone" ! Let's
> talk about some kind of import and export - maybe some (very specific
> and not so frequently used) features are incompatible between Planner
> and MS Project, but I think that most of core features are similar.

ok, the main issues with xml import were:
Calendars - MS has no concept of a day type - unless they've added it in
2007 (high severity)
Resource Groups - Data stored in different manner (medium severity)
Properties - MS did not save them to the xml file (minor)

So MS Import compatibility issues should be handled in this order.

>From there, we could start to look at functional differences in the
tools, and see what makes sense to address.

> > Yeah, the best way would be to reengineer MPP import/export in libplanner natively, but it would be good to see compatibility added in MPXJ.  More options - good.  Less options - bad.  ;-)
> Jon, MPXJ developed, have written yesterday that he has added the
> reading from Planner format - so it would be possible to convert from
> Planner to MS Project. I am going to test this.
> Of course, more options is always better, choice is always good! MPX
> is Java application and I like Java, but many people do not like to
> install Java, so they could use Planner without Java.

That would be great!
-- 
Kurt Maute <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.