I've had some first hand experience with this. I wrote a somewhat widely used open source program (in <cough>VB<cough>) to convert RTF to HTML. Then when Win2K came out they changed their format (not the spec - just the way they interpreted the spec) just enough so my program didn't work anymore...still that was really my fault for not following the spec as completely as I should have. On Thu, 2002-02-14 at 08:39, Dave Sherohman wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 10:39:55PM -0600, Dan Churchill wrote: > > I guess I didn't realize just where rich text format originated, but to be > > fair, this is at least one "standard" which M$ has released so that other > > people can use it. I found the definition online at: > > http://www.programmersheaven.com/zone22/cat187/2602.htm > > > > Of course, in true M$ fashion, the legalese gives them the right to basically > > change it for no good reason and not tell anyone, which quite possibly has > > happened . . . I wouldn't know, as I almost never use it, and have never > > needed to write programs to read or write it. > > I'm fairly sure that it has, since I've heard a number of comments > over the years about "this is what the RTF spec says, but the _real_ > standard is however Word does it this week". When talking about a > proprietary standard, it seems that "proprietary" usually trumps > "standard". > > -- > When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists > have already won. - reverius > > Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Tom Swiss > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >