| ▲ | viraptor 6 hours ago | |
Not that I don't believe you, but something feels off... > conversion to Word 2003 format That's a twenty year old almost-dead binary format. Why would you do that instead of .docx? Or just a PDF. > They opened the file and they said the formatting was off. Who cares about formatting on a work summary? Did it have something more interesting than you can put in .rtf? > not until office for Mac reached feature parity It hasn't. There's still a difference in feature support. | ||
| ▲ | kenjackson an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |
People often will use .doc rather than .docx when they’re trying to convert to a format that non-Word apps are more likely to be able to parse. And bad formatting can result in an almost unreadable document. For example all bullet levels becoming the same, which is an example of something I’ve seen before. None of this seems off to me. | ||
| ▲ | graemep 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
> That's a twenty year old almost-dead binary format. I assume its an old story as recent version of MS Office can read ODF formats. | ||