Preparing to convince to shift to non-propriety documents formats

[Boaz Rymland]

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt <pub at goldshmidt.org> wrote:

>
>
> 2012/2/5 Boaz Rymland <boaz.rymland at gmail.com>
>
>>
>> of course the whole reason to this thread and me contacting the principal
>> is the fsck'ed up document. The document appears badly in LibreOffice
>> and Google docs (imported). I verified this since sept. 1st till now, on a
>> weekly basis. Yes, OO does read the document and sort of presents the data
>> within, including ok hebrew but I don't want and deserve to do guess work
>> or work harder to try to read a basic document I need to get. I want it to
>> be perfectly accessible to me, at least it is for M$ Office users.
>>
>
> How about suggesting that such docs should be exported into HTML (which
> Word is capable of doing, IIRC) before emailing? It would be nice if the
> creator could look at the HTML in a browser to verify that it looks OK. of
> course, the browser is likely to be IE 32-bit...
>

I think that's not the best solution. I'd rather have the teacher spread
documents as either links to google docs documents, ODT documents, or PDF,
exported from those documents. I tend to think that the order described
above is the desired order of preference, at least to my taste and line of
thought. Google docs is the easiest and is portable anytime when google
will change something on their side. ODT is more cumbersome (requires
installation of OO on the systems used by the teachers) but is truly open
format, lasting solution. PDF is i think more comfortable to "transport"
than exported HTML.
I think that asking the staff to "export to html, check in your browser,
then possibly create a zip with the file + directory that contains the
images,etc" is too clumsy and will result in the initiative to drop dead
too soon.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/pipermail/linux-il/attachments/20120205/4ede7a36/attachment.html>