On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:03:00AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >Think of it this way: If we had already accepted that the web archive >system wrapped flowed text, and someone came up arguing that it should >not "because it breaks long command lines", would they be given the time >of day?
Let's see. We're imagining things, are we? *I* think that if the tables were reversed and someone said that "it breaks long command lines" I would slap my forehead, say "What was I thinking?" and personally send the person a check for $372.21. Then I would spend all of my available time, ignoring wife, children, and job (pausing only to pat the dog occasionally) as I struggled to fix the archiving software. >I think not. I think the counter argument would be "Yes we know it >makes the occasional command-line appear line-wrapped, but that is a >nano-issue compared to the downside which is that it will mess up the >display for all the flowed messages, which is a far bigger issue." Postulating how you think people would react and then using their supposed reaction to bolster your argument really isn't a very persuasive method for making a point. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
