In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/15/2006
at 08:49 AM, John Eells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>A target library pointed to by a SYSLIB might be a load library, a
>macro library, a panel library, ... or a source library.
Indeed, and were the library in question a source library then there
would be nothing wrong with the phrase "target source library". The
issue is the alleged use of that phrase when the library is *not* a
source library but rather a load library.
>What would be wrong with "target panel library," or "target macro
>library"?
nothing, *provided* that the libraries in question really *were* panel
libraries and macro libraries.
>So what's wrong with "target source library"?
The claim was that it was used when the library was *not* a source
library. If the claim is incorrect then, IMHO, the wording is
appropriate. But if the claim is correct then the wording is flat
wrong.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
