Why doc? Why? (sigh)

Because Word is pretty much standard in many, many offices around the world these days. If you send a potential agent a file in a format they can't open, it won't matter how good your submission is: it'll get deleted and an automatic rejection sent. If your text editor can save in .pdf or .rtf, you should be okay, however; many agencies ask for those formats, as well as .doc. (NOTE: Even if you send an html file and they can open it in Internet Explorer? Still iffy. It's best to stick to the tried-'n'-true submission guidelines.)

Well, duh. It's because of Microsoft's megalomanic desire to rule the world and their success thereat.

I do accept that it's easiest to do business when we're all working with the same tools. It's unfortunate that MS won that battle. (If I'd bought a lot of MS stock early on, I might have a different opinion as regards to how fortunate it is that things ended up that way....LOL!)

Don't look at me either. I use iWork with OpenOffice around just in case. I don't even have MS Office on my computer. I refuse to install it.

Because word is easiest to get, most commonly used, and pretty much every other writing software out there lets you save in word format.

I thought .rtf was the universal format. I've never encountered a computer that couldn't open that.

Chasing the Horizon said:

I thought .rtf was the universal format. I've never encountered a computer that couldn't open that.

Click to expand...

But I've encountered many editors who want it sent in .doc

fivetoesten said:

I always thought it was best to seperate content from presentation. I'm just complaining.

Click to expand...

I like you a lot!! I totally could have said that myself

There is probably a tool that can take your code and put it into rtf quite well, btw. I'd think. Or is that one of those obvious things that's not often done? You know MS wouldn't add the obvious!

fivetoesten said:

So Word and doc have become the defacto standard. I think we should be working to change that.

Click to expand...

Most of the places I've submitted to take rtf, so it is changing (to rtf). I'd prefer they didn't go to open source formats, because no one seems to agree on which open source format. That means I'd be locked into a word processor that handles that specific open source format (which is no better than people being locked into using Word).

Rtf on the other hand... I've yet to find a modern word processor that doesn't save as rtf. It's the file type I use to transfer between different word processors, because it's the most likely to work without formatting errors.

(Html is a definite no. It's designed for viewing on the web, not for attaching to emails. It'd be a nightmare for editors.)

fivetoesten said:

This is a bit of a rhetorical question, I suppose, as well as an old standby gripe. Why are we stuck with Word, and doc as a submission format? I happen to like to write with a text editor and then format with latex or docbook or html or something like that. I always thought it was best to seperate content from presentation. I'm just complaining. If anybody has any idea about how to work around this problem it would be great. If not, no biggie, I'm just venting. Feel free to complain with me!

Click to expand...

I'm not "stuck" with Word, I use it because I believe it's far and away the best tool for the job. As for DOC, sometimes agents and editors want DOC, and sometimes they want RTF. What's the problem? Or are you just an OpenDocumant fanatic?

You can think what you want, but you're the writer, not the agent, and not the editor, and both have sound and solid reasons for wanting the format they ask for.

Separating content from presentation is just plain silly. If you want to do this, if you want to write in a text editor and format in latex or anything else, go ahead. Who cares? It's your time, and if you want to waste it, fine. But don't waste the time of agents and editors.

As an editor, I don't care what tools you use, whether you want to separate content and presentation, or whether you want to carve the words into stone, etc. But when you send me something to read and to edit, you'd darned well better have it the way I need and want it because I have to deal with hundreds of writers, and we all must be on the same page. Word is the only tool I've found that guarantees this, though any good word processor is fine on the writing end.

But as long as you have proper format and proper file format when you actually send it, fine, however you do it.

OpneDocument has nothing to do with it. That isn't a writing argument, it's a philosophical argument, and one I couldn't care less about. And if I can't open an OD file, and you send one anyway, you're just flat out of luck.

It's silly to say DOC isn't even compatible with itself, but if you don't like DOC, send rtf. But don't send me an OD because I don't have time to mess with it.

It is what it is.

A standard had to be decided on and that was it.

fivetoesten said:

This is a bit of a rhetorical question, I suppose, as well as an old standby gripe. Why are we stuck with Word, and doc as a submission format? I happen to like to write with a text editor and then format with latex or docbook or html or something like that. I always thought it was best to seperate content from presentation. I'm just complaining. If anybody has any idea about how to work around this problem it would be great. If not, no biggie, I'm just venting. Feel free to complain with me!

Click to expand...

No.

fivetoesten said:

How would you feel about receiving a pdf submission? I can generate a pretty nice pdf.

Click to expand...

Fuck no.

I think it's key to remember: you're not submitting a BOOK, you're submitting a MANUSCRIPT.

fivetoesten said:

So Word and doc have become the defacto standard. I think we should be working to change that.

Click to expand...

The only way to change that is to create word processing software that's better than Word and then package it as a suite of better software, including an email client (like Outlook), slide presentation application (like PowerPoint), spreadsheet application (like Excel), and graphics creation software (like Visio). Because that's what you get with MS Office and THAT's why it's the de facto standard. Not simply because Word is the best word processor since sliced effing bread. Because it ain't. But it's darn well good enough.

Meh, I'll send my MS in cuneiform if that's what it takes to get it read. That would be MY_MS.cun, I believe.

Phaeal said:

Meh, I'll send my MS in cuneiform if that's what it takes to get it read. That would be MY_MS.cun, I believe.

Click to expand...

That sounds vaguely obscene. I like it!!

fivetoesten said:

I always thought it was best to seperate content from presentation.

Click to expand...

?

willietheshakes said:

I think it's key to remember: you're not submitting a BOOK, you're submitting a MANUSCRIPT.

Click to expand...

This.

I'm not sure what you mean by separating content from presentation, but writing in Word is, for me, invisible. It's no different than when I used to type on a typewriter.

I type and when I'm done, I have my manuscript.

It is a pity. Plain text and HTML are universal. But most people think it's "easier" to use a gargantuan word processor that they have great difficulty in learning to configure and control, and which loves to crash and corrupt data.

Also, free software doesn't make a lot of money for Micro$oft.

I love AkelPad (or gedit, or whatever).

shaldna said:

Because word is easiest to get, most commonly used, and pretty much every other writing software out there lets you save in word format.

Click to expand...

It may be the most commonly used, but it is most definitely not the easiest to get. Far from it.

Matera the Mad said:

It is a pity. Plain text and HTML are universal. But most people think it's "easier" to use a gargantuan word processor that they have great difficulty in learning to configure and control, and which loves to crash and corrupt data.

Also, free software doesn't make a lot of money for Micro$oft.

I love AkelPad (or gedit, or whatever).

Click to expand...

I don't understand how typing in HTML is easier. You have to type < p > before every paragraph and < / p > after every paragraph. Then all the other coding. How is that "easier?"

As far as Word. What was there to configure? Sure, I created a template that I call up when I start a story, it automatically gives me 1 inch margins, 12 pt Courier type with double spacing and .5" indents. But that wasn't hard at all. Probably took me a couple minutes.

And with Spell Check, word count, headers and footers, and the ability to save in a whole bunch of different formats, I'm not sure why you'd want to use a simple text editor over Word.

Or OpenOffice, which is what I use because it's more compatible with my operating system then my archaic version of Word.

Shadow_Ferret said:

I don't understand how typing in HTML is easier. You have to type < p > before every paragraph and < / p > after every paragraph. Then all the other coding. How is that "easier?"

Click to expand...

I don't know about anyone else, but I export to html when I want to post something in SYW or elsewhere online. Adds in all the code for you.

kuwisdelu said:

I don't know about anyone else, but I export to html when I want to post something in SYW or elsewhere online. Adds in all the code for you.

Click to expand...

Export it from what? Word? Nothing "adds" html code when exporting. What happens during export is the process exposes html code in text that's already formatted. Pure text (.txt) has no code (like in Notepad) because it has no formatting.