> : > :<xmp>? stands for "example"... There's probably a better way though... > > That tag is way deprecated in the standards, and is handled > inconsistently in some browsers, although it still works in the > versions of IE and Netscape that I have here. I wouldn't use it on a > Real Site(tm), though - use character entities, like you're supposed > to. Trying to keep up support for crap tags like this is partly why > modern browsers are so nasily bloated and buggy. If it's just for a > small one-off personal thing, though, go ahead and play in your > dirty little inflatable wading pool with your blink tags and center > tags and your unclosed paragraph tags. Goddamn degenerates.
So, then the "official" way is to use the special characters for "<" and ">"? Seams kindof lame. Then again, i don't close my <p> tags, so what do i know. > ps. I am officially sad about the reply-to setting. You mean that it goes to the listname and the original sender? This can be changed, but mailman recommends the better method is reply to both/all. I believe that the thinking has something to do with making it easier to reply to individuals "off line". I can easily change it. This is up for debate. What does everyone else think? Cheers, sach _______________________________________________ Bits mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sugoi.org/mailman/listinfo/bits
