taler-merchant-demos

no-word-attachments.html (14919B)

---

 <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
 <!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
 <!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
 <!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays upholding action" -->
 <!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
 <title>We Can Put an End to Word Attachments
 - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
 <meta http-equiv="keywords" content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, Linux, general, public, license, gpl, general public license, freedom, software, power, rights, word, attachment, word attachment, microsoft" />
 <meta http-equiv="description" content="This essay explains why Microsoft Word attachments to email are bad, and describes what you can do to help stop this practice." />
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.translist" -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
 <div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>We Can Put an End to Word Attachments</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address>
 
 <p>
 Don't you just hate receiving Word documents in email messages?  Word
 attachments are annoying, but, worse than that, they impede people from
 switching to free software.  Maybe we can stop this practice with a
 simple collective effort.  All we have to do is ask each person who
 sends us a Word file to reconsider that way of doing things.</p>
 
 <p>
 Most computer users use Microsoft Word.  That is unfortunate for them,
 since Word is proprietary software, denying its users the freedom to
 study, change, copy, and redistribute it.  And because Microsoft
 changes the Word file format with each release, its users are locked
 into a system that compels them to buy each upgrade whether they want
 a change or not.  They may even find, several years from now, that the
 Word documents they are writing this year can no longer be read with
 the version of Word they use then.</p>
 
 <p>
 But it hurts us, too, when they assume we use Word and send us (or
 demand that we send them) documents in Word format.  Some people
 publish or post documents in Word format.  Some organizations will
 only accept files in Word format: I heard from someone that he was
 unable to apply for a job because resumes had to be Word files.  Even
 governments sometimes impose Word format on the public, which is truly
 outrageous.</p>
 
 <p>
 For us users of free operating systems, receiving Word documents is an
 inconvenience or an obstacle.  But the worst impact of sending Word
 format is on people who might switch to free systems: they hesitate
 because they feel they must have Word available to read the Word files
 they receive.  The practice of using the secret Word format for
 interchange impedes the growth of our community and the spread of
 freedom.  While we notice the occasional annoyance of receiving a Word
 document, this steady and persistent harm to our community usually
 doesn't come to our attention.  But it is happening all the time.</p>
 
 <p>
 Many GNU users who receive Word documents try to find ways to handle
 them.  You can manage to find the somewhat obfuscated ASCII text in
 the file by skimming through it.  Free software today can read most
 Word documents, but not all&mdash;the format is secret and has not been
 entirely decoded.  Even worse, Microsoft can change it at any time.</p>
 
 <p>
 Worst of all, it has already done so.  Microsoft Office 2007 uses by
 default a format based on the patented OOXML format.  (This is the one
 that Microsoft got declared an &ldquo;open standard&rdquo; by
 political manipulation and packing standards committees.)  The actual
 format is not entirely OOXML, and it is not entirely documented.
 Microsoft offers a gratis patent license for OOXML on terms which do
 not allow free implementations.  We are thus beginning to receive Word
 files in a format that free programs are not even allowed to read.</p>
 
 <p>
 When you receive a Word file, if you think of that as an isolated
 event, it is natural to try to cope by finding a way to read it.
 Considered as an instance of a pernicious systematic practice, it
 calls for a different approach.  Managing to read the file is treating
 a symptom of an epidemic disease; what we really want to do is stop
 the disease from spreading.  That means we must convince people not to
 send or post Word documents.</p>
 
 <p>
 I therefore make a practice of responding to Word attachments with a
 polite message explaining why the practice of sending Word files is a
 bad thing, and asking the person to resend the material in a nonsecret
 format.  This is a lot less work than trying to read the somewhat
 obfuscated ASCII text in the Word file.  And I find that people
 usually understand the issue, and many say they will not send Word
 files to others any more.</p>
 
 <p>
 If we all do this, we will have a much larger effect.  People who
 disregard one polite request may change their practice when they
 receive multiple polite requests from various people.  We may be able
 to give <em>Don't send Word format!</em> the status of netiquette,
 if we start systematically raising the issue with everyone who sends
 us Word files.</p>
 
 <p>
 To make this effort efficient, you will probably want to develop a
 canned reply that you can quickly send each time it is necessary.
 I've included two examples: the version I have been using recently,
 followed by a new version that teaches a Word user how to convert to
 other useful formats.  They are followed by several suggestions sent
 by other people.</p>
 
 <p>
 You can use these replies verbatim if you like, or you can personalize
 them or write your own.  By all means construct a reply that fits your
 ideas and your personality&mdash;if the replies are personal and not
 all alike, that will make the campaign more effective.</p>
 
 <p>
 These replies are meant for individuals who send Word files.  When you
 encounter an organization that imposes use of Word format, that calls
 for a different sort of reply; there you can raise issues of fairness
 that would not apply to an individual's actions.</p>
 
 <p>
 Some recruiters ask for resumes in Word format.  Ludicrously, some
 recruiters do this even when looking for someone for a free software
 job.  (Anyone using those recruiters for free software jobs is not
 likely to get a competent employee.)  To help change this practice,
 you can put a link to this page into your resume, next to links to
 other formats of the resume.  Anyone hunting for a Word version of the
 resume will probably read this page.</p>
 
 <p>
 This page talks about Word attachments, since they are by far the most
 common case.  However, the same issues apply with other proprietary
 formats, such as PowerPoint and Excel.  Please feel free to adapt the
 replies to cover those as well, if you wish.</p>
 
 <p>
 With our numbers, simply by asking, we can make a difference.</p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 <em>You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
 proprietary format, so I cannot read it.  If you send me the plain
 text, HTML, or PDF, then I could read it.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Sending people documents in Word format has bad effects, because that
 practice puts pressure on them to use Microsoft software.  In effect,
 you become a buttress of the Microsoft monopoly.  This specific
 problem is a major obstacle to the broader adoption of GNU/Linux.
 Would you please reconsider the use of Word format for communication
 with other people?</em></p>
 
 <p>
 (Explanatory note: I can handle ODF too, but it isn't very convenient
 for me, so I don't include it in my list of suggestions.)</p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 <em>You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
 proprietary format, so it is hard for me to read.  If you send me
 plain text, HTML, or PDF, then I will read it.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Distributing documents in Word format is bad for you and for others.
 You can't be sure what they will look like if someone views them
 with a different version of Word; they may not work at all.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Receiving Word documents is bad for you because they can carry
 viruses (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus).
 Sending Word documents is bad for you because a Word document normally
 includes hidden information about the author, enabling those in the
 know to pry into the author's activities (maybe yours).  Text that you
 think you deleted may still be embarrassingly present.  See
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154479.stm for more
 info.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>But above all, sending people Word documents puts pressure on them
 to use Microsoft software and helps to deny them any other choice.  In
 effect, you become a buttress of the Microsoft monopoly.  This
 pressure is a major obstacle to the broader adoption of free
 software.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Would you please switch to a different way of sending files to other
 people, instead of Word format?</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Microsoft is already starting to make Word users switch to a new
 version of Word format, based on OOXML.  Its specs are 6000 pages
 long&mdash;so complex that probably no one else can ever fully implement it&mdash;and
 Microsoft can sue you for patent infringement if you try.  If you
 don't wish to join in this attack against interoperability, the way to
 avoid it is by deciding not to use Word format for interchange.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Both versions of Word format allow <a href="https://outflank.nl/blog/2019/05/05/evil-clippy-ms-office-maldoc-assistant/">incorporation of malware</a>.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>To convert the file to HTML using Word is simple.  Open the
 document, click on File, then Save As, and in the Save As Type strip
 box at the bottom of the box, choose HTML Document or Web Page.  Then
 choose Save.  You can then attach the new HTML document instead of
 your Word document.  Note that Word changes in inconsistent
 ways&mdash;if you see slightly different menu item names, please try
 them.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>To convert to plain text is almost the same&mdash;instead of HTML
 Document, choose Text Only or Text Document as the Save As
 Type.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Your computer may also have a program to convert to PDF format.
 Select File, then Print.  Scroll through available printers and select
 the PDF converter.  Click on the Print button and enter a name for the
 PDF file when requested.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>See https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for more
 about this issue.</em></p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 Here's another approach, suggested by Bob Chassell.  It requires that
 you edit it for the specific example, and it presumes you have a way
 to extract the contents and see how long they are.</p>
 
 <p>
 <em>I am puzzled.  Why did you choose to send me 876,377 bytes in your
 recent message when the content is only 27,133 bytes?</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>You sent me five files in the non-standard, bloated .doc format that
 is Microsoft's secret, rather than in the international, public, and
 more efficient format of plain text.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Microsoft can (and did recently in Kenya and Brazil) have local
 police enforce laws that prohibit students from studying the code,
 prohibit entrepreneurs starting new companies, and prohibit
 professionals offering their services.  Please don't give them your
 support.</em></p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 John D. Ramsdell suggests people discourage the use of proprietary
 attachments by making a small statement in their <code>.signature</code>
 file:</p>
 
 <p>
 <em>Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.<br />
 See https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</em></p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 <a href="/philosophy/anonymous-response.html">Here is a response
 letter</a> to an email message with a Word
 attachment.</p>
 
 <hr class="column-limit" />
 
 <p>
 Kevin Cole of the Gallaudet University in Washington,
 DC, <a href="/philosophy/kevin-cole-response.html">sends out this
 automatic reply message</a> whenever he receives a word
 attachment.  (I think it is
 better to send the responses by hand, and make it clear that you have
 done so, because people will receive them better.)</p>
 </div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
 <div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
 <div class="unprintable">
 
 <p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
 <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
 There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
 the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
 to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
 
 <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
         replace it with the translation of these two:
 
         We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
         translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
         Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
         to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
         &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
 
         <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
         our web pages, see <a
         href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
         README</a>. -->
 Please see the <a
 href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
 README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations
 of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
 <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
      files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
      be under CC BY-ND 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
      without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
      Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
      document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
      document was modified, or published.
 
      If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
      Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
      years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
      year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
      being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
 
      There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
      Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
 
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2002, 2003, 2008, 2020, 2021 Richard Stallman</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
 href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
 Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
 
 <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
 $Date: 2021/09/05 09:34:35 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>
 </div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
 </body>
 </html>