1 |
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Daniel da Veiga |
2 |
<danieldaveiga@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 15:16, Paul Hartman |
4 |
> <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> wrote: |
5 |
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Grant Edwards <grante@××××.com> wrote: |
6 |
>>> On 2009-01-27, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
7 |
>>>> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 06:29:55 Grant Edwards wrote: |
8 |
>>>>> On 2009-01-26, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
9 |
>>>>> > These are shared documents. I can't just change what they are |
10 |
>>>>> > based on my own preferences. |
11 |
>>>>> > |
12 |
>>>>> > I need an app that WRITES .docx. If Office 2007 is the only |
13 |
>>>>> > one that does it, so be it. But a workaround or another way to |
14 |
>>>>> > skin this cat is not what I need here. |
15 |
>>>>> |
16 |
>>>>> In my experience, finding an app that writes .docx isn't going |
17 |
>>>>> to be good enough if the documents are shared. If you're |
18 |
>>>>> exporting or importing something just one time, you can get |
19 |
>>>>> usually away with it after some minor fixing afterwards. |
20 |
>>>>> |
21 |
>>>>> But if it's a shared document and needs to be edited multiple |
22 |
>>>>> times by multiple people, you just can't get away with using |
23 |
>>>>> two different apps -- hell, not even two different versions of |
24 |
>>>>> MSWord. If you go back and forth many times, the document will |
25 |
>>>>> steadily "deteriorate" with each transition from one app to |
26 |
>>>>> another. At least that's my experience. |
27 |
>>>> |
28 |
>>>> That's pretty much the conclusion I came to as well. Thanks |
29 |
>>>> for sharing though :-) |
30 |
>>> |
31 |
>>> I realize I'm arguing a moot point, but using something like |
32 |
>>> .docx for shared documents that need to be maintained by |
33 |
>>> multiple people for a long time (more than a month or two) is a |
34 |
>>> dead awful choice. |
35 |
>>> |
36 |
>>> A plain ascii text file is probably the best choice for |
37 |
>>> portability and longevity. However, that suggestion's probably |
38 |
>>> not going to fly because it severly limits the amount of time |
39 |
>>> you can waste picking out eye-shatteringly ugly font |
40 |
>>> combinations and f*&king up margins, gutters, leading, and all |
41 |
>>> the other things people like to mess up rather than doing real |
42 |
>>> work. |
43 |
>>> |
44 |
>>> My next choice would probably be something like RTF. If you |
45 |
>>> get into a jam it's mostly-human-readible. If you limit |
46 |
>>> yourself to simple formatting features it's about as portable |
47 |
>>> and robust as anything you can find that allows the inclusion |
48 |
>>> of graphics. The support for vector graphics (e.g. SVG) is |
49 |
>>> pretty slim, but bit-mapped graphics support works pretty well. |
50 |
>>> |
51 |
>>> HTML would seem to be a good choice as well, but even more than |
52 |
>>> RTF you've got to limit what features you use. The only way to |
53 |
>>> keep the file from deteriorating into a mess is to avoid any of |
54 |
>>> "WYSIWYG" HTML editors. |
55 |
>> |
56 |
>> Google Apps is great for sharing documents.. You can even have |
57 |
>> multiple people editing in real-time and see each other's work. It's |
58 |
>> kind of fun, and all you need is a web browser. |
59 |
>> |
60 |
>> Again, irrelevant to the OP since he can't change his company's |
61 |
>> policy... but good to keep in mind for anyone who can :) |
62 |
>> |
63 |
> |
64 |
> I had this problem a while ago. I'm using CrossOffice with Word 2000 |
65 |
> and needed to open and change some docx. |
66 |
> Microsoft launched a compatibility pack for Office 2000, it works |
67 |
> great, I'm using it, you may find more info and some tips here: |
68 |
> |
69 |
> http://stuffem.wordpress.com/2007/07/14/quick-tip-reading-office-2007-docx-files/ |
70 |
|
71 |
Of course the compatiblity pack has the same problem, it does not |
72 |
magically give older Office the new features. If someone using Office |
73 |
2007 actually uses new 2007 features, they will be lost when you open |
74 |
in the older Office version. |
75 |
|
76 |
On the other hand, if the person who created the document isn't using |
77 |
any 2007-exclusive features, they should not use the 2007 format, and |
78 |
then you could avoid this whole nightmare in the first place. |
79 |
|
80 |
Paul |