So adding one more program to the mix adds that many more things that can be
incompatible.
I am no longer following you here: What do you propose ? Knowing that OO
has the option to save in W97 or W2k format (besides other formats):
Assume you have Office 2000. You compose a Word document using the super
duper templates and one teensy VBA stub you don't even notice or know
about, and which uses a feature not present in W97. You send it to
someone who uses O97. Is it compatible ? Is that what you are saying ?
Next you will tell me that
No, I will not tell you that, and I don't play with other people's
straw men :)
Ok.
In the more common case the client wants a file that can be read by MS-Word.
They may want to mark it up. If it's a go-between (like an agency) they may
want their editor to go over it. PDF is often not an option.
Yes, but, lacking a crystal ball, how can you tell what type of Word
they use ? Because if they use W97 and you use W2k then they will likely
lose if you send them a message. Or rather, someone else will win,
because they will draw the conclusion that they need to upgrade.
Latest example: a few months ago I was sent a form as a word document by
actcom staff wrt. upgrade of service. I filled it out in OO and saved it
as W2k I think. Then I got a phonecall about their not understanding
which mishbetzet in the table I had ticked. Hmm, deja vu ?
Other examples:
Different versions of NetMeeting do not work together. Most versions of
NetMeeting use an invalid INVITE sequence at the beginning of a
transaction so they do not work with other SIP clients, such as older
versions of NetMeeting. Excel spreadheets work fine until you have an
embedded object that belongs to the newer widget set. Embedded VBA which
cannot be controlled by the average user almost always causes problems.
Web pages made with certain versions of front page will not render in
either ff, opera or anything else excepting ie. Embedded objects which
use the Windows-only CLSID hash as the id of the application id for the
plugin are not portable. m$ flavor floaties cause page content with
crazy font sizes to float over pictures and everything else and be
impossible to read. Running the w3c validator over such pages lights up
just about every error I can think of.
So with what, exactly, do you have to be compatible ? With the latest
version ? (O2003 ?). With O2k which is common ? With O97 which is the
lowest common denominator ?
Did you know that there are 96000 hits on google for the search:
"convert pdf to html"
on Google, the first of which is the Adobe converter (online, free) ?
And that his Billness will likely ship O12 with 'native pdf support' ? I
wonder how native (and I wonder what kind of noise Adobe is going to
make when m$ extensions will embrace and extend the pdf standard that
was, so far, portable - apropos has anyone else noticed the annoyscreen
in Acrobat Reader 7 on Linux which says that any document (even ones I
made) contains JavaScripts and would I like to enable them ?)
Peter
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
