Doug wrote on 09/04/2003 11:22:35 AM: > There was nothing new to reply to. Same > question, same answer.
Actually its more like same question, same non-answer.
Everyone from 2 of the other editors to Andrea question the usefulness of this feature in CAP 1.0 given our inability to achieve the original intent. You seem to be the only one steadfastly opposed to removing it from CAP.
Bruce - 4 people replied today - two said yes (me and it looks as if Bernard by replying is saying yes, you said no, and Andrea said no). Bernard proposed the NAME/QUERYID change - do you want us to think that that means 'NO' to stored queries?
And you just posted TODAY - so don't you feel just a little bit embarrassed that you declare 'Everyone from 2 of the other editors...' question ... it?
And you have failed to find *anything* that supports your assertion of the 'original intent'.
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
-------------------------------|-----------------------------
Doug@xxxxxxxxx | Office: (208)612-INET
http://Royer.com/People/Doug | Fax: (866)594-8574
| Cell: (208)520-4044Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature