Peter De Berdt wrote: > On 29 Sep 2009, at 16:13, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: > >>> OK... I Understand... >>> But this is a requirement from my client... >> >> If it were my client, I'd be asking why. The fact that the client >> excluded RTF suggests that the client is being unreasonable -- I can >> think of no use case where RTF *shouldn't* be just as good an option >> as >> MS Word format. > > And to put it quite simple: the old Word format is a closed format and > there is no rubygem available for reading or writing Word files on > Linux since no one has gone through the effort of reverse engineering > it (and there are more than enough alternative solutions available > such as RTF and HTML).
I believe you may be incorrect on the reverse-engineering part. Plenty of other software reads and writes old MS Word files -- which means that *someone* figured out the spec... > > > Best regards > > Peter De Berdt Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org mar...@marnen.org -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
