5 ms·
Check the article again. It's not about layout preserved when printing, it's about actual spaces being deleted in the editor and then kept deleted when you save
by zzleeper 16y ago
Check the article again. It's not about layout preserved when printing, it's about actual spaces being deleted in the editor and then kept deleted when you save the file.
- recoiledsnake 16y agoMaybe I need to spell it for you and those downvoting the OP. The headline says 'Open XML' (implying a bug in the standard format) whereas the article is talking about Office 2007 and Office 2010. See the difference?
- rbanffy 16y agoIt's the implementation of the standard in Office 2007 and 2010
- recoiledsnake 16y agoSo a more appropriate title could be 'Microsoft's Office embarassment' ? Or not?
- rbanffy 16y agoI think MS Office Open XML and MS Office are pretty much very related. Nobody would implement that standard if it weren't for Microsoft pushing it. And the title implies that, apart from MS Office Open XML, Office is not embarrassing. One may disagree with that implication, but the title is more specific.
- recoiledsnake 16y agoThere is a big difference between a file format and the program that makes use of it(even though they are related and even if the same entity developed both) that you're failing to grasp in multiple comments.
- rbanffy 16y agoIf you read the title carefully, you may also interpret as Microsoft's Open XML embarrassment. Since I am unaware of other Microsoft products that implement the standard, I see no problem with the title. It's embarrassing, it's embarrassing to Microsoft and it's about MS Office Open XML.
- timanderson 16y agoThese look like implementation defects to me. I do not know if the problem is in Word 2010, or Word 2007, or both. It is specific to Open XML since if you use the .doc format the problem goes away. It is embarrassing since Open XML is meant to the new and better format, and this is a good reason not to use it.