Re: RTF - proprietary or open?

On Mon, 2007-25-06 at 10:18 -0400, Celejar wrote:
I'm using Abiword, which recommends using RTF for document exchange
with non-Abi users. I'm trying to understand whether RTF is an open
standard. Wikipedia [0] claims that it's proprietary. This article
[1] points out that it has the same status as PDF. I can't imagine
that Abi would recommend a non-open standard, and even prefer it to ODF
(OASIS / XML) [2]. What does it even mean for a file format to be
open? That the creator can't restrict its use? That the spec has been
published?

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Text_Format
[1] http://www.tkachenko.com/blog/archives/000657.html
[2] http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/2003/Apr/0167.html


I had a quick look at abiword a long time ago and quit using it for this
very reason. I guess the rtf format is still readable by most word processors
(I don't have good info, I don't use them) and that's the reasoning why abiword
uses it. I could never get happy with it myself and that's why I don't
use it. I couldn't get happy with koffice/kword for the same reasons
although I believe kword supports ODF now and I hope this will continue
to be the case with koffice and other word processing applications like
abiword in the future.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Relevant Pages

  • Re: RTF - proprietary or open?
    ... that Abi would recommend a non-open standard, and even prefer it to ODF ... I had a quick look at abiword a long time ago and quit using it for this ... very reason. ... I guess the rtf format is still readable by most word processors ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: kids and their furniture?
    ... I would always honor and respect any house rules I was ... standards that differed significantly from the range of behaviors ... I think it's pretty close to the legal 'reasonable person' standard. ... too much work to reason one's way through every single ...
    (misc.kids)
  • Re: I dont get how the computer arrives at 2^31
    ... > Standard isn't always as careful with the language it uses. ... something that will make its functionality "equivalent" to fprintf(). ... function that created the va_list value passed to vfprintf(). ... The reason is that, unless ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: How do you imagine future Common Lisp standard ?
    ... Scheme doesn't focus on good macro ... Goodness and Badness must be evaluated in a particular design-space ... It's fortunate that this can be done without change to the standard, ... There's no reason to define the old language away, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Understanding # and function variables
    ... That's the reason for my statement that I don't care whether a ... >>change is standard compliant or not. ... >>substantial revision of ANSI Common Lisp and would provide equally ... I will find out about an already existing language that is strictly ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)