Re: OT: Is .RTF an Open Standard?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:23:34AM -0600, Kent West wrote:
> I'm trying to educate some users on the dangers of proprietary file
> formats. But to make sure I've got my facts right, I need to ask: Is the
> Rich Text Format (.rtf) an open standard? (In other words, can I say
> something like "Use an open standard format, like .RTF"? Or do I need to
> say "Use a less proprietary format like .RTF"? I would prefer to say the
> first one.) I understand it was developed by Microsoft, but is it owned
> by Microsoft? Do I understand that there are actually two different .RTF
> formats?
My understanding is that there is an official RTF spec which is owned
by Microsoft, but available to everyone, and a "real" RTF spec which
essentially boils down to "however the current version of Word feels
like doing things". I would definitely consider RTF to be "less
proprietary" rather than "open".
OTOH, RTF is substantially better than doc simply be virtue of not
being able to host viruses/worms/trojans.
> Is there a true open standard format, that is easily
> created/used/editted on any platform, other than text? (Text (ASCII? -
> and what's the difference between DOS ASCII and Windows ASCII, and Text
> ASCII, etc?) would be ideal, except for the inability to do such things
> as bold, font color, etc).
How about HTML? Or, if you're willing to give up the idea of WYSIWYG
and embrace WYAFIWYG (What You Ask For...), TeX/LaTeX rocks. Both
HTML and TeX use plain-ASCII source files and there are GUI editors
for both as well. (If you're going to give people GUI HTML editors,
though, you should beat it into their heads that, even though it's
GUI, it's _not_ WYSIWYG. The HTML may render very differently on my
screen than it does on yours.)
--
When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists
have already won. - reverius
Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Tom Swiss
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: