anti-word

[Thomas Ward]

Well, as far as I have understood it the reason Microsoft has been allowed
to get MS Word out to the masses is simplisity.
It is easier for sighted users to move the mouse to the toolbar, click
center, and be done with it. Ask any number of Joe Smo users, and they would
gripe to high heaven if they had to do all documents using something like an
html tag such as:

<BR><CENTER> Chapter 1. </CENTER>

On seeing this debate I can see opening pico and writing a paper in html to
be useful. The reason for a blind user we don't have to double check the
wordprocessor to make sure it did what it clamed. if there is a <I> </I>
around a certain place of text we know it will be in italics.
However, there are many businesses that won't budge. They want to import
there Word, Excel, and access files into Linux and demand some cross
platform compatibility.



----- Original Message -----
From: Gregory Nowak <gnowak1 at uic.edu>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: anti-word


> And how do you expect them to know about the other platforms if all they
know about their windows computer is how to turn it on and off?
> Greg
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 12:17:03PM -0500, Charles Crawford wrote:
> > Hello Amanda, Janina and other interested listers,
> >
> >          Well, looks like the world of advocacy is impinging on planet
> > Linux.  It is correct to point out that in the ideal there should not be
a
> > word processing standard imposed by a company, but as we all know, the
> > sender of a word file getting a text file back might not see the world
in
> > the same way.  Don't you just hate it when that happens.  Smile.
> >
> >          I guess my view is that if word users want to communicate with
> > those who don't use word, then they have to adjust to the realities of
> > other computer platforms.  Consumer choice still has it's place!
> >
> > -- Charlie Crawford.
> >
> >
> >
> > At 11:09 AM 01/13/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Amen! to that Janina!
> > >
> > >Amanda
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Janina Sajka" <janina at afb.net>
> > >To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
> > >Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 11:06 AM
> > >Subject: Re: anti-word
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Steve Holmes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes and if a word document is sent to you for your input and
editing,
> > >I'm
> > > > > sure the original party would expect the thing to come back in
Word
> > >format
> > > > > along with the built-in formatting, styles and such.  Some of this
whole
> > > > > anti Word sounds arogant to me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I rather think it arrogant to presume everyone wants and reads Word.
I
> > > > regard it as arrogant to presume we all pay tribute to Microsoft. I
> > > > further regard it arrogant to treat a proprietary, non-consensus,
file
> > > > format as some kind of standard.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Speakup mailing list
> > >Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup