4 ms·

I'm a long time (7 years) contributor to pandoc. Other frequent contributors often drop by here as well. Happy to answer questions, ask us anything.

by tarleb 6y ago

einpoklum 6y ago
I speak (and write) a right-to-left language. I'm not a pandoc user (so far); and have struggled many times in the past with bugs and lacking features in LibreOffice and LaTeX regarding right-to-left text layout and language-specific issues. My question: How "trustworthy" is pandoc in handling right-to-left content and side-stepping the minefield of target format issues involving such content? Is this subject getting explicit attention from maintainers?
- tarleb 6y ago
  Pandoc should be usable for users of all languages and scripts. It is possible to define the documents language via the `lang` metadata field; `ltr` and `rtl` attributes can be set for individual text elements. Core contributors are westerners or Russian (US, UK, Switzerland, Germany, Russia), and we rely heavily on user reports to improve non-LTR scripts and languages. But the goal is to make pandoc work flawlessly for everyone.
- mb2100 6y ago
  see https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#language-variables https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#language-variables
- mcswell 6y ago
  I have used Xe(La)TeX and the bidi package for mixed rtl and ltr script documents. I don't recall any problems with that. There's also a polyglossia package, but I have less experience with that.
nwaheed 6y ago
I want to use it in commercial product, is it allowed?
- tarleb 6y ago
  Pandoc is licensed under the GPL version 2 or later. I know of a couple of companies where pandoc is used in proprietary systems server-side. IANAL, so best to consult one for your specific use case.
- dwheeler 6y ago
  I presume you mean a proprietary license. Probably yes, you just have to obey the license. The Linux kernel and git are also GPL. In general, if you're not linking it into your software you're fine, but see the license for details. Under US law at least, open source software is commercial: https://dwheeler.com/essays/commercial-floss.html https://dwheeler.com/essays/commercial-floss.html
deskamess 6y ago
Are there any filters/plugins that could create a good workflow for converting a pdf that is multiple pages of very clear text images? Think of each page having a few printed multiple choice questions. Is there an easy way to get it into a text document? Some command (or commands) that can be wrapped in a script: > convert2txtViaOCR.sh -i input.pdf -o output.txt Thanks.
harry8 6y ago
There seem to be not so many haskell applications that succeed to the point where they are of general use, as in not simply useful to programmers doing programming (probably in Haskell) At least this is a frequent observation about Haskell and one I've made myself. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11907839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11907839 Obviously around here the ideal is we keep language wars/boosterism/accusations of being a virus etc out if it (Hey I /like/ Haskell, I've just found it useful for my brain rather than being especially useful for performing data transformations that come my way). /If/ you accept that premise, why do you think Pandoc has been so very successful where perhaps other applications written in haskell have not? The Problem domain (something about writing parsers)? The contributors? The culture? Something else entirely? Of course if you reject that premise I'd also be interested to hear your thoughts on it in as much detail as you care to provide. Cheers.
- tarleb 6y ago
  First, let me challenge the premise: the list of popular Haskell projects on GitHub is far longer than you might expect. Pandoc isn't even the most popular one: https://github.com/search?q=language%3Ahaskell+stars%3A%3E1000 https://github.com/search?q=language%3Ahaskell+stars%3A%3E10... But there still may be some truth to the claim. A simple fact is that smaller mind share -> fewer programs -> less chance for extremely successful projects. From personal experience: it took me three tries and multiple months to get comfortable enough with Haskell to the point that I was able to write my first contribution to pandoc (the org-mode parser), despite having dabbled in functional-style Lisp for years before that. But Haskell, as used by pandoc, isn't difficult. In fact, I often find it easier to use Haskell, thanks to its excellent type system. It's just very different and requires a bit more investment up front, with huge benefits lurking down the road. Data to support my claim that Haskell is actually easy to use: over 300 people have contributed to pandoc, with over 100 contributing Haskell code. Many of those contributors have never written any Haskell before, but the type system helped them to find their way. I talked a bit about the whole topic here: https://youtu.be/JpNEIpLtCHs https://youtu.be/JpNEIpLtCHs
  - tikej 6y ago
hadley 6y ago
Could you shoot me an email? I’m always on the lookout for pandoc freelancers.

I'm a long time (7 years) contributor to pandoc. Other frequent contributors often drop by here as well. Happy to answer questions, ask us anything.

by tarleb 6y ago

I'm a long time (7 years) contributor to pandoc. Other frequent contributors often drop by here as well. Happy to answer questions, ask us anything.

einpoklum 6y ago

I speak (and write) a right-to-left language. I'm not a pandoc user (so far); and have struggled many times in the past with bugs and lacking features in LibreOffice and LaTeX regarding right-to-left text layout and language-specific issues. My question: How "trustworthy" is pandoc in handling right-to-left content and side-stepping the minefield of target format issues involving such content? Is this subject getting explicit attention from maintainers?

tarleb 6y ago
Pandoc should be usable for users of all languages and scripts. It is possible to define the documents language via the `lang` metadata field; `ltr` and `rtl` attributes can be set for individual text elements. Core contributors are westerners or Russian (US, UK, Switzerland, Germany, Russia), and we rely heavily on user reports to improve non-LTR scripts and languages. But the goal is to make pandoc work flawlessly for everyone.
mb2100 6y ago
see https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#language-variables https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#language-variables
mcswell 6y ago
I have used Xe(La)TeX and the bidi package for mixed rtl and ltr script documents. I don't recall any problems with that. There's also a polyglossia package, but I have less experience with that.

nwaheed 6y ago

I want to use it in commercial product, is it allowed?

tarleb 6y ago
Pandoc is licensed under the GPL version 2 or later. I know of a couple of companies where pandoc is used in proprietary systems server-side. IANAL, so best to consult one for your specific use case.
dwheeler 6y ago
I presume you mean a proprietary license. Probably yes, you just have to obey the license. The Linux kernel and git are also GPL. In general, if you're not linking it into your software you're fine, but see the license for details. Under US law at least, open source software is commercial: https://dwheeler.com/essays/commercial-floss.html https://dwheeler.com/essays/commercial-floss.html

deskamess 6y ago

Are there any filters/plugins that could create a good workflow for converting a pdf that is multiple pages of very clear text images? Think of each page having a few printed multiple choice questions. Is there an easy way to get it into a text document? Some command (or commands) that can be wrapped in a script: > convert2txtViaOCR.sh -i input.pdf -o output.txt Thanks.

harry8 6y ago

There seem to be not so many haskell applications that succeed to the point where they are of general use, as in not simply useful to programmers doing programming (probably in Haskell) At least this is a frequent observation about Haskell and one I've made myself. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11907839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11907839 Obviously around here the ideal is we keep language wars/boosterism/accusations of being a virus etc out if it (Hey I /like/ Haskell, I've just found it useful for my brain rather than being especially useful for performing data transformations that come my way). /If/ you accept that premise, why do you think Pandoc has been so very successful where perhaps other applications written in haskell have not? The Problem domain (something about writing parsers)? The contributors? The culture? Something else entirely? Of course if you reject that premise I'd also be interested to hear your thoughts on it in as much detail as you care to provide. Cheers.

tarleb 6y ago
First, let me challenge the premise: the list of popular Haskell projects on GitHub is far longer than you might expect. Pandoc isn't even the most popular one: https://github.com/search?q=language%3Ahaskell+stars%3A%3E1000 https://github.com/search?q=language%3Ahaskell+stars%3A%3E10... But there still may be some truth to the claim. A simple fact is that smaller mind share -> fewer programs -> less chance for extremely successful projects. From personal experience: it took me three tries and multiple months to get comfortable enough with Haskell to the point that I was able to write my first contribution to pandoc (the org-mode parser), despite having dabbled in functional-style Lisp for years before that. But Haskell, as used by pandoc, isn't difficult. In fact, I often find it easier to use Haskell, thanks to its excellent type system. It's just very different and requires a bit more investment up front, with huge benefits lurking down the road. Data to support my claim that Haskell is actually easy to use: over 300 people have contributed to pandoc, with over 100 contributing Haskell code. Many of those contributors have never written any Haskell before, but the type system helped them to find their way. I talked a bit about the whole topic here: https://youtu.be/JpNEIpLtCHs https://youtu.be/JpNEIpLtCHs
- tikej 6y ago

hadley 6y ago

Could you shoot me an email? I’m always on the lookout for pandoc freelancers.