> But it also sounds like 99% of the audience want DOC files Depends on your audience.
There are two kinds of placement agencies / headhunters / employers. One is volume-oriented. They have a pool of 4500 candidates with a set of keywords in their CVs, and a pool of 2000 positions descriptions with their keywords. They send CVs to prospective employers if 3 or more keywords match. [A large company may have a need to hire 30 programmers and they may easily expect to receive hundreds if not thousands CVs, so the problem is the same.] These cannot be bothered to deal with one candidate whose CV is in a different format. The other kind deal with hand-picked candidates, high level positions, get higher fees (or expect a high return from a successful fill, in case of employer), and have no problem investing a bit of extra effort in opening a PDF file or loading HTML in Word and saving. A simple matter of ROI. I suspect that the people who commented on this thread and admitted to maintaining "non-traditional" (or maybe "traditional"?) CVs - Muli, Nadav, myself - will not deal with the first kind of agency, ever. FWIW, I can't recall getting a request for a .doc CV in a very long time. I'd say one needs to figure out whether one should target volume-oriented or hand-picking outfits, and act accordingly. > and it's a > lot of effort to maintain that format from LaTeX, > isn't it? No. It would, however, be a lot of effort for me to create a new (and good looking) CV in a word-processor. Especially since I maintain several versions of my CV - full (with some level of detail), brief (that fits into 2 pages - I am not that young and have a history), sanitized versions of both (with contact info stripped) - all that to assist headhunters and potential employers with different needs and requirements. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | p...@goldshmidt.org _______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
