On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:46:08 +0100, Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc> wrote: >> One of the arguments that was made was also that the existing methods >> have failed, which would make #3 the odd one out and probably #2 as >> well. "I don't really care what the final name, but it should match >> the first principle..." > > Given the editor's strong stance for your own viewpoint, it seems that > your deference to him is not altruistic. I was merely negating your argument, hence the quotation marks. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2006 22:50:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:56 GMT