|
 |
> You know, PDF manages to look the same everywhere. This clearly
> demonstrates how "impossible" it is to write such a standard.
Ermm, no, I have seen several PDF files with forms and buttons etc that only
work properly in Acrobat Reader. I guess they are using Adobe specific
extensions that nobody else implements.
> You know, PDF specifies exactly how stuff should look on a page - and
> *lots* of people have implemented that.
Word (and PDF to a certain extent) allow you to do far more than just say
how it should look when printed or print previewed.
> HTML & CSS allow you to construct complex layouts, and these are also
> widely implemented.
But usually look slightly different on almost every browser!
> That's kind of the point. It shouldn't *be* a way of storing Word
> documents, it should be a way of storing documents.
Sure, then just ignore the Word specific stuff and parse the document data
to display. But when you export form Word that extra data is there should
you wish to implement certain things that Word does. If MS only exported
exactly what you saw there would similar outcry about how it is impossible
for developers to implement the same functions as Word.
> I have converted Word documents to ODF and back again, with little or no
> change to the document.
That's because you've only been using the "basic" features of Word, which is
fine. But some people might want to develop programs to work with the more
advanced features of Word, previously they couldn't - now they can, but they
don't have to.
> The fact is, this is not the case. Nobody is going to be able to implement
> this standard properly, because it is specifically and deliberately
> designed to be impossible to implement. And that should not be allowed.
"Implementing the standard" is not a digital yes no thing, you can implement
just the parts you need for your application. As Darren said, if you wanted
to implement the whole standard perfectly you'd essentially have to write a
copy of Word.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
