[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"