[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal

To: wg-c@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
From: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:45:21 +0900
In-Reply-To: <199907302203.PAA24039@agamemnon.home.com>
References: <Your message of "Fri, 30 Jul 1999 17:35:05 EDT." <3.0.2.32.19990730173505.00d1abc4@pop.interport.net>
Sender: owner-wg-c@dnso.org

At 15:03 30-07-99 -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
>   So the whole argument about whether a SLD is
>"memorable" is pretty much irrelevant.

An overly simplistic hypothesis, methinks! BobC



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"One test is worth three expert opinions!"
Ulric B. Bray

References:
- Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
  - From: "Martin B. Schwimmer" <martys@interport.net>
- Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
  - From: "Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
Next by Date: Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
Prev by thread: Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
Next by thread: Re: [wg-c] Retraction of previous proposal
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread