In short - yes. OOo will allow formatting that when saved as .rtf (or any other non OOo format) may be lost.
My $0.02 worth on the whole subject (and no I've not read the article yet) is that a file format that is purely textual and formatted is the best choice. OOo native format is just that. Even if OOo suddenly dissappears in 10 years time (assuming there will still be a text editor of course) you can still read your files. /paul On 5/26/05, Duncan Lithgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi there, I've enjoyed using OOo for a fair while, and I like that it > can export in rtf and doc etc. But one of my worries is that often > things are not quite the same. I understand the reasons for this and am > not apportioning blame but have a question. > > Can I use RTF as OOo's _native_ format? I've set it as the default, but > I don't know if the temp files are internally written as rtf or > something else. I want to know if, for example, OOo will let me do > things which it cannot actually save/record in the RTF format. > > Background to this question is part of my work on a book/article I'm > writing in wikibooks on _Future Proofing Electronic Records_ in which I > recommend the RTF format as it is the most widely supported (yes, I know > about OpenDocument etc, read the article before suggesting that RTF is a > poor choice.) > > Future Proofing Electronic Records: > http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/How_to_future_proof_electronic_information > You are very welcome to edit and improve the article. > > Duncan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
