[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"