From: Andy Sawyer (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-07-28 08:27:46
(Sorry to continue the massively off-topicness of this thread but:)
On 27 July 2000 12:08, John Maddock wrote:
> >If formatting is essential, Rich Text Format .rtf which is macro free is
> >OK,but not everyone can easily read it.
> Unfortunately that's not true, if you take a word file and change the
> extention to .rtf,
...which doesn't make it a Rich Text Format file, it makes it a Word
document file with a .rtf extention. "A rose by any other name...".(*)
> then word will still open it as a full word file complete with macros
This is because Word is "smart" enough to actually look at the contents
of a file to figure out what format it is. A little like (most) *nix shells
and the shebang (#!) syntax.
But if it actually IS a Rich Text Format file, then there are no macros
to execute, as the original poster said.
(If you're actually using Word, then:
1) You have my deepest sympathy. IMHO, Word is an application from the
"cornered rat" school of user interfaces.
2) To convert a Word .DOC file to .RTF, select the "Save As..." option
on the File menu. The dialog which appears will have an option to select
the file "type". (On Word 97, it's a combo labelled "Save as type"). Select
Rich Text Format as your type)
(And to add fuel to the debate, I personally prefer PDF as a formatted
format(???), but not everyone can write it...)
(*) No, I have no idea why I'm comparing Word files with roses, but a spot
of The Bard always seems to go down well :-)
-- Andy Sawyer, Technical Director, Sufficiently Advanced Technology Ltd. mailto:andys_at_[hidden] ICQ:14417938 http://www.morebhp.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk