On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 09:56 +0100, Simon Morris wrote: > On Sun, 2006-07-23 at 02:22 +0100, Tom Chance wrote: > > Ahoy, > > > I think it would be worth picking up the weird allegation about the > > size of > > RTF files versus DOCs. I always thought it was the reverse - bloaty > > DOC files > > taking forever to download for a bit of thin formatting! What is this > > "one > > user's experience"? The whole paragraph comes across as a bit of fluff > > written on Slashdot, which is unfortunate because the rest of the > > article is > > informal but at least more informative. > > > > A suggested rewrite of the format bit, which is longer but I hope a > > bit > > clearer. The mention of PDFs is also not necessarily on message ;-) > > Thanks Tom, > > I agree your version is a lot clearer. > > I've merged that paragraph in but dropped your use of the words "first" > and "Secondly" as it conflicted with my use of those counters :) > > What is the status of PDF as an official open format for documents? I > believe it was one of the approved formats. > > http://beerandspeech.org/fsfe/Letter_to_ICT_Hub_rev2.txt > > Thanks
Would be worth contacting Richard Smedley of MOST about this. MOST (Midland Open Source Technology) is set up and funded as part of the Birmingham Community Volunteer Service to promote Open Source in the Third Sector. His E-mail is Richard Smedley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'll probably see him at LUG Radio Live to-day so I'll mention it to him > > ~sm > _______________________________________________ > Fsfe-uk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk Ian -- www.theINGOTS.org www.schoolforge.org.uk www.opendocumentfellowship.org _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
