Lists Home |
Date Index |
Michael Champion wrote:
> I agree with what I think is the thrust of Len's point in this thread:
> If you are writing an RFP or a government regulation and need to specify
> a document format that is really and truly open, undeniably a standard,
> and good enough for the vast majority of real-world static "office"
> documents, specify (X)HTML. Beyond that ... If you need more
> richness, there are a lot of options: MS Office XML formats have a lot
> of momentum and have a lot of advantages when the document contains live
How is a distributed (by its nature) MS Office document better for live
data versus something that lives at a centralized location?
> ODF is a cleaner XML format and more easily edited with generic
> XML tools and processed by people who understand the subtleties of
> things like mixed content; DocBook is going to work well for huge
> technical documents, and custom or vertical-industry schemas are likely
> to be important in some niches.
docbook or simplified docbook or some variant in manageable pieces
assembled into whatever end format would be nice
> I can't imagine why anyone thinks they know enough now to write a policy
> that accurately predicts
you can't imagine people who have the power to spend taxpayer's money