| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 15:16, Paul Hartman |
| 2 |
<paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Grant Edwards <grante@××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On 2009-01-27, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 06:29:55 Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> On 2009-01-26, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>> > These are shared documents. I can't just change what they are |
| 8 |
>>>> > based on my own preferences. |
| 9 |
>>>> > |
| 10 |
>>>> > I need an app that WRITES .docx. If Office 2007 is the only |
| 11 |
>>>> > one that does it, so be it. But a workaround or another way to |
| 12 |
>>>> > skin this cat is not what I need here. |
| 13 |
>>>> |
| 14 |
>>>> In my experience, finding an app that writes .docx isn't going |
| 15 |
>>>> to be good enough if the documents are shared. If you're |
| 16 |
>>>> exporting or importing something just one time, you can get |
| 17 |
>>>> usually away with it after some minor fixing afterwards. |
| 18 |
>>>> |
| 19 |
>>>> But if it's a shared document and needs to be edited multiple |
| 20 |
>>>> times by multiple people, you just can't get away with using |
| 21 |
>>>> two different apps -- hell, not even two different versions of |
| 22 |
>>>> MSWord. If you go back and forth many times, the document will |
| 23 |
>>>> steadily "deteriorate" with each transition from one app to |
| 24 |
>>>> another. At least that's my experience. |
| 25 |
>>> |
| 26 |
>>> That's pretty much the conclusion I came to as well. Thanks |
| 27 |
>>> for sharing though :-) |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> I realize I'm arguing a moot point, but using something like |
| 30 |
>> .docx for shared documents that need to be maintained by |
| 31 |
>> multiple people for a long time (more than a month or two) is a |
| 32 |
>> dead awful choice. |
| 33 |
>> |
| 34 |
>> A plain ascii text file is probably the best choice for |
| 35 |
>> portability and longevity. However, that suggestion's probably |
| 36 |
>> not going to fly because it severly limits the amount of time |
| 37 |
>> you can waste picking out eye-shatteringly ugly font |
| 38 |
>> combinations and f*&king up margins, gutters, leading, and all |
| 39 |
>> the other things people like to mess up rather than doing real |
| 40 |
>> work. |
| 41 |
>> |
| 42 |
>> My next choice would probably be something like RTF. If you |
| 43 |
>> get into a jam it's mostly-human-readible. If you limit |
| 44 |
>> yourself to simple formatting features it's about as portable |
| 45 |
>> and robust as anything you can find that allows the inclusion |
| 46 |
>> of graphics. The support for vector graphics (e.g. SVG) is |
| 47 |
>> pretty slim, but bit-mapped graphics support works pretty well. |
| 48 |
>> |
| 49 |
>> HTML would seem to be a good choice as well, but even more than |
| 50 |
>> RTF you've got to limit what features you use. The only way to |
| 51 |
>> keep the file from deteriorating into a mess is to avoid any of |
| 52 |
>> "WYSIWYG" HTML editors. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Google Apps is great for sharing documents.. You can even have |
| 55 |
> multiple people editing in real-time and see each other's work. It's |
| 56 |
> kind of fun, and all you need is a web browser. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Again, irrelevant to the OP since he can't change his company's |
| 59 |
> policy... but good to keep in mind for anyone who can :) |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
I had this problem a while ago. I'm using CrossOffice with Word 2000 |
| 63 |
and needed to open and change some docx. |
| 64 |
Microsoft launched a compatibility pack for Office 2000, it works |
| 65 |
great, I'm using it, you may find more info and some tips here: |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
http://stuffem.wordpress.com/2007/07/14/quick-tip-reading-office-2007-docx-files/ |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
Daniel da Veiga |
Archives