> But how about just ":"? Anyone have any thoughts or know if Larry and the > crew have considered it? > > -matthew- actually i heard that it's believed that ":" can beused for just about anything and for that reason they stay way form it. it has been considered though. i don't really like that justification, and i don't know if it' the only one. -mike
- [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin "->&q... Matthew Brooks
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Dan Sugalski
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Ron Newman
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Matthew Brooks
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Dan Sugalski
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Matthew Brooks
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Kenneth Graves
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Jerrad Pierce
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Kenneth Graves
- Re: [Boston.pm] Breaking "." to ruin &quo... Uri Guttman
