[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: .doc file concerns

From: Mike Castle
Subject: Re: .doc file concerns
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 15:40:10 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.18i

On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 02:56:34PM -0700, Anita Chacko wrote:
> Any alternate way to handle .doc files?

Switch from using binary only formats.  All of the items you mentioned are
problems.  Proprietary formats like Word documents, just can't be handled
well.  There is nothing you can do except not use them.

Personally, I'd recommend using LaTeX to do your documentation.  We used
that with cvs (under win32!) and it worked great.  We able to make
meaningful merges of documentation.  People could easily, see what was
changed (using diff).  It's cross platform (I actually did my work under

And personally, I found it MUCH easier to use than Word (I always get lost
in word.  With TeX, I was able to focus on the content of what I wanted to
write, and worry about how to mark up the structure later).

RTF _might_ be an option, if it uses reasonable formatting in the rtf doc
(ie, not all one big long line).

For the rest of the CVS group:  What about other word processors in the
win32/dos world?  Do any word processors use text only format these days?
(Maybe for a history lesson, what word processors in the past may have used
suitable file formats?  NotaBene?  Word Perfect?  PC/Write or whatever it
was called.  I can't believe they've always been so dense...)

     Mike Castle      address@hidden
    We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan.  -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]