On Fri, 2002-08-23 at 04:51, Holden Glova wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> > Hmm, I've been under a totally different impression... perhaps I'd be
> > better off limiting it to PDF after all.  (On the other hand, I've yet
> > to encounter problems with RTF myself, and it seems at least).
> 
> I was resisting the temptation of using windows for donig all my essays and 
> papers while at university. So I ran Linux, producing my papers and essays in 
> openoffice (staroffice back then). I would save my work as RTF then email 
> them to my school account. I _always_ had to format them at school, mainly 
> things like tables and even simple things like bullet points wouldn't work 
> out the same. I hate to imagine what a moderatly complexly formated document 
> would look like when going from openoffice to MS Word. Ultimately I find that 
> RTF is like Java (sort of) -- you can write it once, but chances are high 
> that you will need to do extra work to get the intended effect :-\

Well, on the other hand, this is true of any format.  If we continued
using .DOC files, it would be just as bad, if not worse.  PDF files are
generally too large, and tend not to render right in many viewers,
including Adobe's official ones (that is, the PDF files generated by MS
products, at least).  XHTML is bad as well, given that the popular
browser doesn't necessarily render it perfectly all the time...

In the end, more people can read RTF files with less trouble than
Office2000 Word files, so RTF it will be.  Some of the larger documents
in need of more powerful formatting will likely end up as PDF, tho.

> 
> - -- 
> Signed,
> Holden Glova
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE9Zfb/0X8w8X71zPcRAnHWAJ9r0lijXezW47G1ekL+vIsbdnNP6ACfRD80
> SfY59VdVryF1f3KuXZnQ7Pc=
> =JXy+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>