Hello Giovanni! * Giovanni Ridolfi <giovanni.rido...@yahoo.it> wrote: > Karl Voit <devn...@karl-voit.at> > >> I thought that using the ODF-exporter would be the format of >> choice to get content from Org to Word. Why do you guys prefer >> HTML? > > A reason could be (in my case) because we cannot have LibreOffice > installed :-(
No need to do that. (Besides: there are portable-versions of LibreOffice[1] so that you can install LibreOffice on any operating system having any kind of reduced permissions. But this is not my point.) > But you're right in remembering me that "write" (and perhaps > word?) can read odf files. I will try odf, thanks! Yes, this was the thing I wanted to mention: Word is able to read in ODF. And since ODF has a *way* more similar kind of "markup" to docx, it should result in much better results than using HTML. But: I never tried it by myself. So I was wondering, if there are good arguments against using ODF in the first place and using HTML as best choice. 1. http://duckduckgo.com/?q=libreoffice+portable -- Karl Voit
