From helbig@man.ac.uk Mon Jun 5 21:46:35 2000 Received: from mailhost.rug.nl (mailhost.rug.nl [129.125.4.6]) by dkuug.dk (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA10334 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:46:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from helbig@man.ac.uk) Received: from gladia.astro.rug.nl (gladia.astro.rug.nl [129.125.6.17]) by mailhost.rug.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA04085 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:46:32 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:32:03 +0100 Message-Id: <00060521320364@man.ac.uk> From: helbig@man.ac.uk (Phillip Helbig) To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22WG5.1825) RE: Nara - use of WORD, WG5 N1384 X-VMS-To: SC22WG5@DKUUG.DK X-VMS-Cc: HELBIG > Is PDF a standard? Is RTF a standard? If not, how are they any better than > WORD, since the virus argument is a red herring anyway. I think the point is that WORD is the product of a specific company, Microsoft. This has disadvantages. One, using WORD "forces" people to use the product of a specific company. I see no need for this; quite the opposite. Two, it is not the right tool for the job. It's like saying one should program in C(++) since it is an "industry standard". Three, it makes transmitted files---which in most cases will be just plain text---much larger than necessary. Four, it is difficult to search it for text strings: I save important emails and can search in an entire folder or file (group of folders in this context) or in multiple files in multiple directories for text strings---not possible with word. Five, it IS a gateway for viruses etc.