Don't feel bad John, I'm still trying to find it too, and have no idea what
it is.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Foulds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Documentation System for Cold Fusion
> I haven't seen Fred's and am trying to find it, but we all know that
> maintaining multiple syntaxes is as ugly as authoring for both IE and NN.
>
> But I'm with you, I don't care which one as long as:
>
> [1] there is a gestation period in firming up the syntax spec
> [2] it is expandable
> [3] it is parsable
>
> John Foulds
> Ottawa, Canada
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Quarto-vonTivadar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > What I'm trying to get a sense for is: can we all agree one type of the
> > three that we could move forward with? I paraphrase Ben Franklin in
saying
> > that any of the three that we pick "may not be the best, but it is the
> best
> > we have".
> >
> > I vote for Fred's simply because it allows the maximum expansion, and is
> > still readable by human eyes in its native format.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in
the body.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
