Re: RTF - proprietary or open?

On Mon, 2007-25-06 at 10:18 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> I'm using Abiword, which recommends using RTF for document exchange
> with non-Abi users. I'm trying to understand whether RTF is an open
> standard. Wikipedia [0] claims that it's proprietary. This article
> [1] points out that it has the same status as PDF. I can't imagine
> that Abi would recommend a non-open standard, and even prefer it to ODF
> (OASIS / XML) [2]. What does it even mean for a file format to be
> open? That the creator can't restrict its use? That the spec has been
> published?
>
> [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Text_Format
> [1] http://www.tkachenko.com/blog/archives/000657.html
> [2] http://www.abisource.com/mailinglists/abiword-dev/2003/Apr/0167.html
>

I had a quick look at abiword a long time ago and quit using it for this very reason. I guess the rtf format is still readable by most word processors (I don't have good info, I don't use them) and that's the reasoning why abiword uses it. I could never get happy with it myself and that's why I don't use it. I couldn't get happy with koffice/kword for the same reasons although I believe kword supports ODF now and I hope this will continue to be the case with koffice and other word processing applications like abiword in the future.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org