save to text or print to file in chrome

[Target]

does anyone know of an xtn that might allow me to either save a web page as text (it's actually plain txt, not HTML) or print it to a (txt) file?

I routinely have to download reports from our systems at work and it appears that chrome simply doesn't have this facility.  I have IE11 too, but when I save as text it introduces a whole bunch of artifacts that are throwing my processing tools off.  Then there's FF, which does do what I need, but I'm so over FF that this is the only thing I use it for and I'd like to consolidate if I could.

[anandcoral]

Hi Target,

I use FF for many extension whose alternatives I can not find in Chrome and I can not browse without those extensions.
Anyway I searched for any text file in Chrome and when I pressed Ctrl+S to save, Chrome gave option to save as text file, see image.

save to text or print to file in chrome

save a web page as text (it's actually plain txt, not HTML) or print it to a (txt) file?

-Target (December 19, 2017, 12:46 AM)

So, if it is a txt file, it will save without ant html markup. But you may get unix coded text instead of dos due to where its server.

Regards,

Anand

[IainB]

If you use @mouser's proggy CHS (Clipboard Help & Spell), then just select everything on the web page, press Ctrl+C, and  CHS saves the clip and automatically strips out anything that is not text. It's quite handy for that. I use it all the time as it is an extremely versatile clipboard management tool  with lots of other uses. It saves me heaps of time.
Best way to find out if it meets your needs is probably to suck-it-and-see (find out for yourself by trialing it).

[Target]

nothings ever simple. 

The files in question are plain text BUT if they are above a certain size their packed into GZip files.  There is an option to open them in a new window, but they're packed without an extension so chrome doesn't recognise them as plain text...

And FWIW while I usually only need them a few at a time, it's not uncommon to need 50 or 100 files, which makes the copy/paste route unviable

[IainB]

@Target: Ah, you seem to have added some new factors there that were apparently not mentioned in your OP.

This initially seemed to be about just scraping text off a screen in a browser, but that's apparently not quite the case.
I don't get the GZip part at all.
Could you tell us what you are wanting to do with the text a- e.g., how it is to be stored and later used?
That might help.

(User requirements.)

[Target]

@Target: Ah, you seem to have added some new factors there that were apparently not mentioned in your OP.

Could you tell us what you are wanting to do with the text a- e.g., how it is to be stored and later used?
That might help.

use case is irrelevant, though FWIW the resultant text files are processed by some VBA macro's for spreadsheeting/analysis

The files are standard reports out of a mainframe sent to a line printer daemon for download.  Presumably the archiving is an attempt to minimise storage requirements.

The issue here is that Chrome doesn't provide me with the capability to save the files as plain text (which is what I need).  Instead it assumes that I must only want certain formats

frankly i don't like chrome.  And I don't like IE.  I used to be a FF fanboy, but they've spoilt that too...  Sadly in this situation these are my only choices, and it feels like they're all colluding to produce a far less efficient and productive toolset...

[IainB]

@Target: Thanks for the clarification.
I might completely misunderstand this, but is there something preventing the mainframe from outputting the data that you require, in files of the required format so as to be input directly to the processing/analysis phase?
That would probably be more timely and efficient and would bypass the need for what seems to be - from your description - an unnecessary overhead cost for an inefficient, constipated/convoluted conversion process.
The "use case" - again, from your description - could thus seem to be highly relevant.
My apologies if I have a hold of the wrong end of the stick here.

[Target]

sadly I work for a big company, which is to say that inefficiency is the norm (no matter what management might say to the contrary)

There is zero chance that the data could be made available in any other format, or via any other means, and certainly not on the scale that we're talking about here (I'm only one of several thousand users, and I do this in order to make these reports usable to others)

[IainB]

@Target: Now that you have explained some of the "finer details" of the context of the problem, it all adds up. I didn't like to say so earlier, but I thought the process you were trying to operate seemed like it was seriously ad hoc and grossly inefficient - and that's putting it politely.
It didn't make any sense to me, so I asked myself "Under what conditions might it make sense?", and I came up with an answer similar to what you describe.
But seriously, inefficient/convoluted/problematic systems and business processes have a potentially high but often hidden cost, so they shouldn't be left unresolved, and people working in such environments are not necessarily going to be happy campers either, which could affect staff turnover (part of the hidden cost). Profitability is thus likely to be adversely affected. It's a wasteful use of resources.

I know that all doesn't help you with your immediate problem though.

Just a thought, where you say:

(I'm only one of several thousand users, and I do this in order to make these reports usable to others)

-Target (December 19, 2017, 11:14 PM)

Have you already considered helping to get the problem resolved properly (i.e., via system and process improvement) by not oiling the squeaky wheel any more? It could really start squeaking then, particularly if management can't get the timely reporting information that they must have to manage their business. If management don't seem to care about the problem at the moment, it'll probably be because they don't perceive it to be a critical problem. You may well be inadvertently perpetuating the problem by offering ad hoc workarounds to it.

[Target]

so you've succinctly summarised the same issue all big businesses/bureaucracies have, pressure to 'succeed'

FWIW I've been banging on about automation to anyone that will listen for years, and its only in the last 12 months that there has been any focus on it.  That said its more to do with the latest management fad of 'digitisation' (and oh man, do I hate that term) than anything I've ever said

But again, this is a business that doesn't recognise efficiency - the tools they built are only replacements for the workarounds we've had in place for years, and some still don't work properly (if at all).  Yet on the back of 'delivering' these boons to productivity they cut our staffing by half...

way to make a wheel squeak...

but we digress, AFAICS the chrome issue is nothing to do with my use case, but more to do with Google determining how I will use the browser.  I fail to see why I don't get to decide what I want to do with whatever is open in the browser (it is in fact its none of their business, or perhaps it is their business and they're failing to deliver). 

[IainB]

I dunno. Presumably these files are on a server somewhere?
I would suggest you experiment with something like GetRight, which has a rather unique sort of download server browser component, where it can look into the server folders at the target server's ftp or http URL. If it can get access (it tries to get access using/making up relevant passwords), then you can browse the folders on the sever and pick and choose which files you want to download and flag them for download. GetRight will then download them individually or simultaneously in batches, in several streams at once, and can be set to provide a detailed download performance log - i.e., what was downloaded from where, and when, and how long the downloads took and how many tries/retries it had with each file, etc.. Once you figure out how to use it, it can be a real timesaver. It can also do bitorrent files, but I have never used it for that, so cannot comment on that aspect. Sucks files down like a vacuum cleaner.

That could provide you with some more control. Once you have the files locally you can maintain them in a library and play with the files to your heart's content, trying to find the best way(s) to access/read them for the next (analysis) phase. The GetRight logs can be really informative/handy too - e.g., to give you some idea if different servers' relative performance. It will also scan mirror sites, but that's probably not of much use to you as you may be using a corporate LAN or or Intranet.

There's  a standard GetRight and a newer Pro version, which latter also handles Uploads, I gather.

[kilele]

This extension for Chrome may be of help. Archive Extractor