s, but also work from early adapters like me.
>>
>> I understand that it is better to change half way than to proceed in
>> error. But if such an important change takes place, one will want to
>> know how it is possible that such an erroneous large part (400 pages,
>> 2
Bert Verhees wrote:
>
>
> So no problem at all, in the end, one could say.
>
> The holy grail is a more generic approach which allows archetypes
> written as simple scripts which can use an information-system flexible
> and even allows ad-hoc creations of archetypes.
> Creating a ne
Thomas Beale wrote:
>
> Bert Verhees wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thomas Beale asked me to write more to this mailinglist, and I have
>> an important issue to discuss.
>>
>> Last thursday, I had a meeting wherein Thomas was present, in fact,
>> it was education about EN13606. After a whole day of talki
lically. Something serious must be wrong somewhere.
>
>
It may be interesting to get a better idea of who are the users of GPICs
- I don't know the answer to that, but I think it might be a relevant
question for you and other implementors of them.
>What also seems very strange t
me, I discussed a GPIC SubjectOfInvestigation
with Edward Glueck and Tom Marley on 25 may 2005, I discussed GPICs with Gerard
Freriks on 4 jun 2005. No mention about the fact that GPICs are obsoleet, or
will be obsoleet in a few weeks from then.
Then on 14 july 2005 I hear that GPICs do not p
5 matches
Mail list logo