Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Dec 2, 2005, at 6:34 AM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > Which is fine for someone who can do all of that and doesn't mind. > Other shops do mind. Good of the many pertains here. Good of the > one is not compromised. > > 1. This thread is centered around the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' > policy to pick a specification to be their standard word processing > format. This isn't about what one guy does in his own shop. Think > scale and cost. And thus it misses a key point. When it comes to Office Document formats, we're really talking about the WP/spreadsheet/presentation trio. Of these three, an increasing proportion of text documents are migrating to various forms of HTML, whether this is a good idea or not, and the most important office-software component is clearly the spreadsheet. While XHTML is increasingly plausible as a presentation package (see S5), and maybe as a text-doc format, nobody is proposing it for spreadsheets. So in the Massachusetts context, XHTML is a red herring. Having said that, I am coming increasingly to the view that if you had an editor with a decent GUI, and (crucially) a good change- tracking facility, XHTML could plausibly expand to fill pretty well all of the workaday-text-document ecosystem. The Kool Kids want to tunnel all sorts of value-adds through here and there and call this "Microformats"; I used to sneer at this until I accidentally invented a resumé microformat (http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/ 2005/11/12/Resume-Blues). Having said that, the jury's way out on virtually everything in the text-document space. But I bet that in the year 2389, the Galactic Federation will still be doing its budgets in something that is recognizably a spreadsheet. -Tim
|
