Wed, 15 Feb 1995 22:45:51 -0500
|
[Nathan replying to s.merchant]
> >I don't consider the above description of "on-line manual" to be a ...
> ...
> Yes, that's the plan. Also hope to have it on Web pages and Gopher.
I'm afraid I was simply venting my spleen and not contributing much with my
last note to LSTOWN-L. Luckily for me S. Merchant posted a nice, reasoned
message that outlined one thing I really cared about but hadn't thought
through enough to say: the standard on-line manual should *itself* be of
"book" quality rather than the homespun quality of "miscellaneous files and
LSTOWN-L searches." If I had thought through the issues enough before I
wrote, there would have been no misunderstandings. Sorry.
Needless to say, Nathan's reply comforted me (you too, I hope, Douglas).
Now I will retire into obscurity for a while because I think I have posted
entirely too much near-flaming here. :-)
Norm
--
"Man Minus Ear Waives Hearing"
|
|
|