 |
 |
Both TeX and Word provide an expletive-based approach to layout involving complex tables and floating figures. Sent from my iPad On 25 Jul 2012, at 15:52, "Matthew Dovey" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > For information, Word 2013 (at least in the preview) will open PDF documents for editing. > > Like most PDF to word conversion however, complex formatting can go awry. > > Matthew > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:JISC- >> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr >> Sent: 25 July 2012 15:28 >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: Policies on depositing MS Word files >> >> Even better, the zip file contains a media directory with all the images >> embedded in the document. It's a godsend for third party copyright >> checking. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 25 Jul 2012, at 15:16, "Talat Chaudhri" >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> >> I was once given this tip in terms of reading DOCX files and seeing whether >> they are usable in the long term, which is quite an interesting practical test >> that anyone can do: re-name it as a zip file and then unzip it. Then check >> through the contents, which contains quite a lot of metadata, machine- >> readable packaging, formatting information and the actual content. On that >> basis, it seems fair to say that it will be fairly easily readable and processable >> in the future, even if current software platforms become unusable or >> unavailable. I second Les' remark that it's an entirely different thing to earlier >> DOC formats, which were proprietary and technically difficult to re-use. It's >> probably fair to say that DOCX is not all that bad from a preservation >> perspective. >> >> I might add that ePub seems to take a very similar approach. The metadata it >> contains can in principle be very extensive although in practice it's far more >> restricted. By comparison, there is often a lot that can be extracted from >> DOCX files (really archives), though not in a standard metadata format. But >> there is much more than just traditional metadata, so I wouldn't like to >> restrict the debate just to that. >> >> I'd be interested to know if people agree or disagree with this position on >> technical grounds. It really is worth taking a look for yourself. >> >> >> Talat >> >> On 25/07/2012 14:32, Chris Eaker wrote: >> Sorry if I'm asking novice questions (but that's what I am), are you most >> interested in saving the content or the formatting or both? If the content is >> the most important thing to preserve, then why not just save the file as PDF >> and archive that as the master so you have a copy with all formatting intact, >> but then save a txt for an editable version that maintains content (assuming >> you need to edit in the future)? I'm wary of archiving *.DOC/X files because >> they may not be readable for the long-term. >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Brian Kelly >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> I've always deposited an MS Word copy of my papers in my local repository, >> together with a PDF copy. I've done this because I've been told of the >> importance of preserving the master copy of a resource, rather than a lossy >> derivative version, such as PDF. As I've experience in having to recreate an >> MS Word file from a PDF copy I know this can be a cumbersome process. I >> assume some authors may prefer to deposit a PDF copy as this may be >> regarded as providing a form of DRM by making it slightly more difficult to >> process the file. >> >> What policies and practices do people have in place related to this? A Google >> search for "Policies on depositing MS Word files" suggests that PDFs are the >> norm. Since the MS Office format has been an ISO standard since 2007 I >> assume the proprietary versus open standard format for deposits argument >> is not as strong as it was (subject to caveats about support for ISO/IEC 29500 >> Strict and the arguments about the validity of the standardisation process >> which I don't want to go into). >> >> Thanks >> >> Brian >> >> >> -- >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> Brian Kelly >> Innovation Support Centre, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, UK, BA2 7AY >> Phone: 01225 383943 >> Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Blog: http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/ >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/briankelly >> Web: http://isc.ukoln.ac.uk/ >> >> >> >> -- >> Christopher Eaker, P.E. >> Graduate Research Assistant >> Data Curation Education in Research Centers University of Tennessee, >> Knoxville >> >> >> >> -- >> Dr Talat Chaudhri >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> Research Officer >> Innovation Support Centre >> UKOLN >> University of Bath >> Telephone: +44 (0)1970 626206 Fax: +44 (0)1225 386838 >> E-mail: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> Skype: >> talat.chaudhri >> Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/t.chaudhri/ >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> >