Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:29, Tim Churches wrote: >> Yes, there is clearly a lot more work needed on the coding routines, but >> remember that this was something put together by undergraduate students >> in just a week or so, and given that, I think it shows a lot of promise. >> I suspect that what Jon and his students learn from the text submitted >> will be invaluable for scoping out the extent and difficulty of further >> development. I think this is an exciting project, and I'd much rather >> see time (and perhaps some modest funding) being invested in things like >> this than for us to collectively put our brains in neutral and instead >> just get out the cheque book (Standards Australia will no doubt insist >> that should be check book) and buy (very expensive) software from >> companies such as http://www.healthlanguage.com > > that's why, although a late starter I have started putting in entries and > subsequent comments
Yes, sorry, my argument was intended to be rhetorical, not directed specifically at you, Liz. I know that you don't suffer from the national tendency to technological cargo cultism [1]. Tim C [1] Credit for the phrase "technological cargo cult" is due to the Department of Redundancy Dept. _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
