Heath Frankel wrote: > Tom, > Not sure of the need for <= or >=. It's either beyond the value reading > capability of the device or an actual value is record (within some accuracy > tolerance). > > Heath > > yes, this has already been mentioned - Vince has never seen it in the millions of results his software has processed. Vince suggested we put it in for completeness, but now that you hvae made me think of it...maybe we should only allow what makes sense, i.e. =, >, <.....with ~ still to be resolved...
- thomas
