From: "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >But anyway, lets put that aside.
guess you didn't read that. > It is not X has always been done this way thus we should do it. The > arguement is "Changing an accepted standard breaks a lot of environments > with little or no advantage". > Your argument is that we should NOT provide additional information (the task producing a particular piece of output) because that affects the ability of some editors to parse the output. That information is an advantage to me. It helps me know which task is failing. How do you find that out? Why do I have to lose that information? Conor
