On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 23:46:08 +0100, Doug Schepers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the arguments that was made was also that the existing methods
have failed, which would make #3 the odd one out and probably #2 as
well. "I don't really care what the final name, but it should match
the first principle..."
Given the editor's strong stance for your own viewpoint, it seems that
your deference to him is not altruistic.
I was merely negating your argument, hence the quotation marks.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
