On Dec 5, 2007, at 5:14 PM, Paul Newton wrote:
> A bit like DBFs ... OK I know there isn't really a comparison but it
> seems to me that the DBF format has, perhaps surprisingly, stood the
> test of time
My impression is the opposite: DBFs have not been sufficient, so the
Fox team has repeatedly modified it to add things that are now
considered essential. That's resulted in Fox data only being readable
by Fox itself for the most part. Back when DBF was a standard, any
app could read/write to it.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
