On 2000.06.30, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >get them processed on Unix. Maybe that's not necessary, but I always > >argue with any decision that (in practice) drives data or a process out > >of the realm of portability. > > ... so what format do you suggest? HTML is the best - still (imho) I'm a major fan of runoff. :) -- -D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] NSIT University of Chicago
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Kai Blin
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Mrinal Kalakrishnan
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Mrinal Kalakrishnan
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Charles Curley
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Mrinal Kalakrishnan
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... David Champion
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... David Champion
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Mrinal Kalakrishnan
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Mrinal Kalakrishnan
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Kai Blin
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Telsa Gwynne
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Marius Gedminas
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Charles Curley
- Re: those users (was "Re: Reply to all???"... Suresh Ramasubramanian