Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

RFC: rebol-framework / list-view

 [1/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 12-Nov-2002 18:04


Hi, I'm interested in your opinion how the following challange can be solved: - A user can do a fulltext-search through all records. - As a result a list of all matching records are returned. - The list can include several kind of record-types (address, project, note). - Records have a different number of fields. - Records of the same type can have different number of fields. I now want to show a list to the user where he can pick a record. The selected record is than displayed. So what I want is a multi-record-type-list-view :-)) The questions/ideas I have are: 1. Foreach record-type get a list that defines the order of data-fields for the row. 2. Find the highest number of data-fields from the records in the result set(that's already working). 3. Somehow do a list layout and size the columns to fit the maximum data length. Any other ideas? Robert

 [2/16] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 13-Nov-2002 0:12


Robert M. Muench wrote:
>Hi, I'm interested in your opinion how the following challange can be >solved: > >- A user can do a fulltext-search through all records. >- As a result a list of all matching records are returned. >- The list can include several kind of record-types > (address, project, note). >
Ah :-) Robert, if you wrote this mail because of my msgs at IOS Messenger, well ... it was just an idea ... but I have already stop here and explain: My objection was as follows: Building database (relational) stuff for quite some time, working closely with end users, I observed one strange phenomenon. Ppl tend to look for visual data representation. I will take our real-life confirmation order example. What does SAP offers by default e.g. is pretty stupid and it leads to pretty bad customs. In SAP, all you have in your menu (tree) is - edit Contract, new Contract. Well, so you want to edit last contract from company X - how are you supposed to do that? You intuitively go and select Edit Contrac item - the only field which waits for you on the screen is - Contract number. As I said - it is stupid, dumb, screwed. SAP offers reports - but noone will run XY sec report to see list of contracts for company X. So SAP invented so called Help Search (translated from Czech lang term). It is multi tab dialog box with various fields, one of them being Contract number .... so you can type something like "123*", but it does not solve the situation quickly. The proof of wrong aproach is tens of ppl each using various paper-notebooks to keep track of various stuff themselves, on the paper ... In our old system, what we offered was maybe more primitive, but it imo follows user's thinking patterns in more close way. Simply said - show list-view (grid) with usefull info, allow to switch index, let ppl visually select - they know how to use mouser wheel, arrows, enter, insert, delete and escape keys - clean, simple, fast. We also offered our users various tree-views, but they were not so popolar as grid based ones. And now - don't ask me why - ask users :-) Of course, it is our environment, so everyone of us could have different experience here .... I am not sure it is usefull to have list of different BOs mixed? If I know I am looking for a Company, I will select company, and then get list-view related to company information ... now what domain specific info related to company can I be interested in? - Offer, Confirmation of Order, Order, Invoicing, etc. - but only at ONE of them at the time - and here comes navigation - company ---> offer | order | invoice ... etc. But once I get into context of company/invoices - I see just invoices. So, I am not sure it is usefull to perform full-text search and offer mixed list-view with different kind of info .... not for db app .... maybe for some kind of knowledge base - yes ... I hope others will comment too ... I am not the only developer coming from XBase area here surely ;-)
>- Records have a different number of fields. >- Records of the same type can have different number of fields. >
tree-view or grid - I think we will not invent something revolutionary here. Powerfull grid systems allow users to choose which table columns they want to see etc.
>I now want to show a list to the user where he can pick a record. The >selected record is than displayed.
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
> length. >Any other ideas? Robert
not sure .... good points surely ... I will have to think about visual data representation, but from what I know, I don't know if there is any better way of how to visualise data to users, than what is typically available in other environments .... -pekr-

 [3/16] from: brett:codeconscious at: 13-Nov-2002 11:07


> in your menu (tree) is - edit Contract, new Contract. Well, so you want > to edit last contract from company X - how are you supposed to do that? > You intuitively go and select Edit Contrac item - the only field which > waits for you on the screen is - Contract number. As I said - it is > stupid, dumb, screwed. SAP offers reports - but noone will run XY sec
:^)) Yes, I've worked on similar systems. Such things belong in history. A colleague and I had the opportunity to create a data-centric interface with a particular system. We opted to let users navigate the data visually (of course there were some advanced filtering tools). From a list of records - double click the desired one - and they you have the details of the information in its original input layout (though with uneditable fields grayed). The list was not simply a navigation tool only, it was a useful tool in its own right because it contained totals. So by using a filter - people could do ad-hoc online enquiries - drilling down for the information. I'm sure lots of developers have seen and programmed such systems today. The users learnt this way of dealing with their data in a single 30 minute training session, in fact they were telling us how it would be used after about 15 minutes. Quite a constrast to what I heard before. Another data-centric system I built for property managers also had similar results - people understood intuitively how to operate it - which cut my training requirements :^)
> I am not sure it is usefull to have list of different BOs mixed? If I > know I am looking for a Company, I will select company, and then get > list-view related to company information ... now what domain specific > info related to company can I be interested in? - Offer, Confirmation of > Order, Order, Invoicing, etc. - but only at ONE of them at the time -
In the system I referred to above, we had a list (grid) of mixed transactions. When viewed all together and ordered in date order they provided a comprehensive transaction history. They could be filtered on type or by party/entity. So some columns were available across all transaction types, some were not. Where a transaction had no information in a particular column - it was left blank. I think people do this sort of thing naturally on paper. You can imagine that this was supported by some sophisticated programming - and it was. I user might imagine they were dealing with a single part of the system - under the hood there were all sorts of supporting components.
> >Any other ideas? Robert
You could specify a list of fields that must be shown [name addresss contact-person fax ...]. This list could also specify the order you want them presented in. You could allow this list to be selected from a union of the available fields across your records - like we did in the system I described above - and in this case to leave blank those cells that are not applicable to the record. Alternatively you could mandate that this list is to be selected from the intersection of the available fields across your records, making your display code somewhat easier perhaps. Our system was far less dynamic than the one you are working on so the number of possibilities we had to deal with was finite :^) A second block could specify your column widths - no more ideas on that from me though :^) Regards, Brett.

 [4/16] from: greggirwin:mindspring at: 12-Nov-2002 20:58


I don't have time to fire up my old machine that has TrackRecord on it, but I recall that it had an interesting way of dealing with the issue of heterogeneous record types. I'd need to pull it up and look at it again in order to do it justice though, and it always struck me as a bit odd, which is why I don't use it on a daily basis. :) Had some cool features though. I did something that is similar to what Brett described, I think. We had a loan application object which contained many sub-records that might be individually edited. The main app had many windows with buttons to pop up dialogs, but there was also an auditor feature that looked through the app for missing data and gave you a list (a shallow tree actually) of all items with a title/summary/abstract of each item. From there you could jump directly to a dialog for editing. We put a lot of effort into the main program but found that some users would actually just fire up the auditor and walk down the list of items. :\ TurboTax also has some nice features (e.g. multiple views of data) IMO. -- Gregg

 [5/16] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 13-Nov-2002 7:03


Brett Handley wrote:
>>in your menu (tree) is - edit Contract, new Contract. Well, so you want >>to edit last contract from company X - how are you supposed to do that?
<<quoted lines omitted: 8>>
>(of course there were some advanced filtering tools). From a list of >records - double click the desired one
we allowed to press enter to edit the record, insert to insert new one, delete to delete it, and escape to close the window - ultra fast ... forget your mouse ;-)
> - and they you have the details of >the information in its original input layout (though with uneditable fields >grayed). The list was not simply a navigation tool only, it was a useful >tool in its own right because it contained totals. So by using a filter - >people could do ad-hoc online enquiries - drilling down for the information. >I'm sure lots of developers have seen and programmed such systems today. >
a good ones! Powerfull grid system. Grid system we used was pretty advanced too. You could specify headers, but also footers, multiline rows, various designs, coloring for certain values. Users could add/remeove columns, specify collumn order, width, etc ... and save their set-up .... Ppl have yet to learn, how ineffective is tree-view in that regard. The whole Windows Explorer crap - how can anyone use it for navigation? It is good for selecting path/context, but not as a data viewer ...
>The users learnt this way of dealing with their data in a single 30 minute >training session, in fact they were telling us how it would be used after >about 15 minutes. Quite a constrast to what I heard before. > >Another data-centric system I built for property managers also had similar >results - people understood intuitively how to operate it - which cut my >training requirements :^) >
of course :-)
>>I am not sure it is usefull to have list of different BOs mixed? If I >>know I am looking for a Company, I will select company, and then get
<<quoted lines omitted: 10>>
>column - it was left blank. I think people do this sort of thing naturally >on paper.
I think that it can be easily done for the same record structures. But I had something slightly different in mind. Look at following screenshots: http://www.robertmuench.de/rebol-framework-howto.html Now as you can see, rotary button shows contact/company. But you can enter whatever you want in the text field, so I tried "MikroTOP", name of 'project item in RFM system. Now ask yourself - is that the case in real-life, where you have your data organised? If you already know MikroTOP name, you surely know what it relates to - it is a project. So it was me who suggested Robert the ability to select "context" by rotary button, and use it already as a filter - simply once I select "project", all projects available should be listed. If there are other BO structures related to the project, it should be somehow displayed. So if I translate it into graph structure - I wanted following enhancement at least: - selecting particular context on the left (master) side, would alredy provide grid/list of relevant items. Clicking upon one of them would/could do something on the right (detail) side, e.g. bring "project name" box in the middle of the pane, and then graph of relations would be displayed. So if there is e.g. relation from company --> employee, pressing employee box would bring it into the centre once again, and left (master) side would list employees for certain = selected company ... The question is, if visual graph is any better than generating buttons for above menthioned relations ("employee") Now: 1) it came to my mind just now drinking morning coffee, so don't count on that :-) 2) I have no experience with graph structure, petri nets and the like ... 3) my POV can be affected by my experience in XBase/relational field, and non-experience in distributed database systems, so I have yet to see, what area is RFM better in, than traditional relational model, expcept the fact, that your per-record-fields can vary ... Anyway ... as for future IOS, I want to see repository based system, roles, rules, workflow mechanisms and better scalability in low-lovel (RMP protocol). It is not call to RT, just a hint of what will come anyway, being done by RT, or user-base. I would welcome more ppl participating on the idea of RFM, distributed databases, etc. The first thing I want to understand is - why relational model is being regarded as outdated by some of developers. I looked at Senteces associative data model, it shows some promise, but I yet have to understand, what is RFM better in than relational model ...
>You can imagine that this was supported by some sophisticated programming - >and it was. I user might imagine they were dealing with a single part of the
<<quoted lines omitted: 9>>
>and in this case to leave blank those cells that are not applicable to the >record.
it could be done probably by inspecting repository of BOs and also probably part of grid-system itself by default ... -pekr-

 [6/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 13-Nov-2002 8:37


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> Ah :-) Robert, if you wrote this mail because of my msgs at IOS > Messenger, well ... it was just an idea ...
Hi, ;-) well I try to keep in sync with user-requests.
> What does SAP offers by default e.g. is pretty stupid
:-) no comment.
> You intuitively go and select Edit Contrac item - the only > field which waits for you on the screen is - Contract number.
That's why my search is default "full-text" based. So just hack in what you know to get started.
> As I said - it is > stupid, dumb, screwed. SAP offers reports - but noone will run XY sec > report to see list of contracts for company X.
Ha, that's pretty strange: Run a SAP report against your data-toilet just to get to one contract.
> So SAP invented so called > "Help Search" (translated from Czech lang term). It is multi > tab dialog box with various fields, one of them being Contract number > .... so you > can type something like "123*", but it does not solve the situation > quickly.
So, this is more like a very detailed search dialog? I have to say that I'm not a SAP user (and I hope I never will). What I have heard is that SAP isn't able to do "fuzzy-searches" or something like this.
> The proof of wrong aproach is tens of ppl each using various > paper-notebooks to keep track of various stuff themselves, on > the paper ...
Yep, IT solves problems we won't have without IT...
> I am not sure it is usefull to have list of different BOs mixed?
If you don't know what you are searching for it makes sense.
> If I > know I am looking for a Company, I will select company, and then get > list-view related to company information ...
Right, and if you don't know that you are looking for a company? I never understood why I have to remember if an information is stored in a company record or a contact record or whereever. And with the ADM where everyone can create Bos you won't know a priori what kind of BO was used. Especially if serveral people work together. For example: Contacts, I have contact BO that fits our German requirements, you have one that fits the Chez requirements. The only thing we agree about is: Both Bos are contacts. But know you strucutre your data a bit different than me and this is absolutly OK because RFM will support your way of working and you don't have to change your work to fit RFM. Know I know you are an Amiga fan and I want to see what you have for Amiga related information. So I hack in Amiga and see where I get a hit. Then I see: Companys, Projects, Meetings etc. I pick on from the list and look at the relation graph... And now things start to make sense to me. I can traverse your Amiga semantic-net. :-)) That's where I want to go to.
> now what domain specific > info related to company can I be interested in? - Offer, > Confirmation of Order, Order, Invoicing, etc. - but only at ONE of
them
> at the time
Why? I'm interested in all kind of information for one comany. That's what I'm missing from todays system. I want to get an overview about the company. With a single click.
> and here comes navigation - company ---> offer | order | invoice ... > etc. But once I get into context of company/invoices - I see just > invoices.
Why? You see everything that's related to invoices, yes. This can be log-entries for telephone calls, reminders, person in charge infos etc.
> So, I am not sure it is usefull to perform full-text search > and offer mixed list-view with different kind of info .... not for db > app .... maybe for some kind of knowledge base - yes ...
Imo it's much more natural way of working with a relation model than to break down everything into single pieces. Humans are very good in relation/association thinking. But you can't work this way. It's an artificial barrier.
> tree-view or grid - I think we will not invent something > revolutionary here. Powerfull grid systems allow users to choose which > table columns they want to see etc.
Yes, that's what I preferr too. I just want to have a gird with x,y size and fill in the rows. Robert

 [7/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 13-Nov-2002 8:37


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> we allowed to press enter to edit the record, insert to > insert new one, delete to delete it, and escape to close the window -
ultra fast ...
> forget your mouse ;-)
Hi, yep :-)) this will be added too! I hate using my mouse for the 80% most likely tasks.
> a good ones! Powerfull grid system.
BTW: Anyone working on a grid system? I know there were some efforts...
> Ppl have yet to learn, how ineffective is tree-view in that regard.
The
> whole Windows Explorer crap - how can anyone use it for > navigation? It is good for selecting path/context, but not as a data
viewer ... Right. But the grid system needs to be easy. Why do I have mark columns, click on an edge to get a perfect width layout? That's what I want be default...
> Now as you can see, rotary button shows contact/company. But you can > enter whatever you want in the text field, so I tried "MikroTOP", name > of 'project item in RFM system.
Ah, now I got what you mean. It just shows contact/company because it's the first entry ;-)). It doesn't have any semantic meaning in this case. Perhaps I should add a "select BO" entry.
> Now ask yourself - is that the case in > real-life, where you have your data organised? If you already know > MikroTOP name, you surely know what it relates to - it is a > project.
Really? It could be a workshop-event, a product etc. For example: You hear/read about MikroTOP and know you want to know what this is. You know that you got this information from me. With RFM you would connect to my data-graph and now you have to ways to get to MikroTOP. 1. Select my person and look at the graph. Maybe somewhere you see the MikroTOP node. 2. Hack in MikroTOP and see what you get. Than you get the information that it's a project. From there you can go on and build up your understanding about MikroTOP. It's like discovering new information.
> So it was me who suggested Robert the ability to select > "context" by rotary button, and use it already as a filter - simply
once
> I select "project", all projects available should be listed.
That's a good idea. And yes I will add it. But it's an other way to work. This is more like the "normal" database pattern.
> - selecting particular context on the left (master) side, > would alredy provide grid/list of relevant items. Clicking upon one of > them would/could do something on the right (detail) side, e.g. > bring "project name" box in the middle of the pane, and then graph of > relations would be displayed.
Hmm... I'm not sure if using three panes is really necessary. You have grid, data-record, graph. Might be a bit complex to handle. Maybe in an advanced user-mode.
> So if there is e.g. relation from company --> employee, > pressing employee box would bring it into the centre once again, and > left (master) side would list employees for certain = selected company
Why would you show the employess of the company and not the projects of the employee? The system can't know what you want to see...
> The first thing I want to understand is - why relational > model is being regarded as outdated by some of developers. I looked at > Senteces associative data model, it shows some promise, but I yet have > to understand, what is RFM better in than relational model ...
It's more powerful if you need to see the big picutre. I'm not sure if it's powerful for transactional systems. Try to build the examples you see on the screenshots of RFM with a relational model. Than try to get the same information level when looking at the graph. Than you will see what I'm talking about... Robert

 [8/16] from: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 13-Nov-2002 9:56


Robert M. Muench wrote:
>>So SAP invented so called >>"Help Search" (translated from Czech lang term). It is multi
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
>I'm not a SAP user (and I hope I never will). What I have heard is that >SAP isn't able to do "fuzzy-searches" or something like this.
I am not sure on fuzzy searches ... it can do wild-char searches though ... that detailed search dialog serves for filtering purposes ...
>>If I >>know I am looking for a Company, I will select company, and then get
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>understood why I have to remember if an information is stored in a >company record
that is my point - our users don't remember number of last contract, but they always know what they want to do - e.g. add new contract, edit some contract, and so they even know, what customer they want edit their contract for. We have imo the same opinion, you just seem to go even further - RFM seems to be more like google upon database :-) - suited for ppl, where they know just word or part of word and they perform the search. It has its uses, but as fo our case - it would not help - user would be stuck, as he knows he want to edit last contract for Robert Muench GmBH, but he/she doesn't remember last number. Or he/she just wants to use previous one in the list to copy it into new one, using part of information from the old one ...
> or a contact record or whereever. And with the ADM where >everyone can create Bos you won't know a priori what kind of BO was >used. Especially if serveral people work together. >
Yes, I can understand it ... ADM is very high level then - it would be usefull for abstracting/merging-info-from various ERPs if I understand it correctly ...
>>now what domain specific >>info related to company can I be interested in? - Offer,
<<quoted lines omitted: 8>>
>what I'm missing from todays system. I want to get an overview about the >company. With a single click.
Ah! CRM like system. But can you imagine how your drawed net structure would look like, if there is e.g. 120 contract for the company per year, each having 30 or more positions (materials - subgrid) etc.? And I am not talking about other docs as advice notes, invoices, etc. etc. How will you organise your display then? Is there any difference in left pane graph and right pane graph? Or do you plan on collapsing/uncollapsing nodeds? E.g. you select customer XY ... info related to such customer is - invoices, contracts ... 100 invoices and contracts ... will you display node for each of them? What about showing named BOs first, e.g. real customer name (as there is only one for each customer), and if there is more than one record for certain Bo, it would be fist shown as "Invoices" node for e.g., with some visual distinction, so user could see he/she can collapse/uncolapse details? Just an idea ... Is there any reference of how other graph based apps work? -pekr-

 [9/16] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 13-Nov-2002 10:27


Robert M. Muench wrote:
>BTW: Anyone working on a grid system? I know there were some efforts... >
I think not ... I think that list can be used for simple cases ... powerfull data-grid style would be more like a component, imo more than 15KB of code ...
>>Ppl have yet to learn, how ineffective is tree-view in that regard. >>
<<quoted lines omitted: 8>>
>click on an edge to get a perfect width layout? That's what I want be >default...
it should be part of set-up object ... auto-column-adjust: true (but there will be problem probably as we have no function available, which checks for string pixel size ...)
>That's a good idea. And yes I will add it. But it's an other way to >work. This is more like the "normal" database pattern. >
maybe you should wait if you are not sure about the idea ....
>>The first thing I want to understand is - why relational >>model is being regarded as outdated by some of developers. I looked at
<<quoted lines omitted: 11>>
>the same information level when looking at the graph. Than you will see >what I'm talking about... Robert
hmm, different needs, different purposes ... as for the display, graph can be OK, but if you need to print e.g? As for trying to build some examples ... is it reall advatage of RFM/ADM or just of its implementation? We should compare how data are organized, what it allows us to do in upper layers, etc., as I can find some nice tool working with relational model under the hood ... unless I don't miss something here ... -pekr-

 [10/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 13-Nov-2002 18:13


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> structure would look like, if there is e.g. 120 contract for the > company per year, each having 30 or more positions (materials -
subgrid) etc.? Yes, quite nice :-)). Several possibilities exist: 1. All contracts are shown in a list ;-)) and are represented by one node. You can scroll the list in the graph and click. I don't know if this would work but we will see. 2. I just use one node for the BO contract (representing every contract). If you click on it you will get a list like you suggested using a grid.
> Is there any difference in left pane graph and right pane graph?
It's just a metapher for work. Left is master, right is detail. The direction is from left to right.
> Or do you plan on collapsing/uncollapsing nodeds?
That's an other thing I'm going to add: A horizont. You can use a slider to set how deep you want to look into the graph. So if you set it to 2 you only will see nodes that have a maximum distance of 2 from the current node.
> Is there any reference of how other graph based apps work?
I don't know many applications using such a model. Anyone else? Robert

 [11/16] from: nitsch-lists:netcologne at: 13-Nov-2002 17:42


On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 08:37:41AM +0100, Robert M. Muench wrote:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 11>>
> That's why my search is default "full-text" based. So just hack in what > you know to get started.
just a thought: fulltext-search could mean fulltext-search! aehm - it is possible to mold the whole database, search in the string and seek back to beginning of business object. advantages: 1) faster with large data-sets and short-running scripts. 'loading 1mb takes some time, 'reading it is lots faster. if you only load the currently displayed parts with load/next.. 2) user can search based on attributes. search for {user: "Pe*}. then [find/reverse found "<business-object-delemiter-tr449bz5>"] load it and display in grid. (with switch to source ;) with rebol-access and parse this could be interesting. ;"tr449bz5": needs to be a unique string, not occuring in data. -volker

 [12/16] from: nitsch-lists:netcologne at: 13-Nov-2002 17:20


On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 10:27:13AM +0100, Petr Krenzelok wrote:
> Robert M. Muench wrote: > >BTW: Anyone working on a grid system? I know there were some efforts...
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> >> > >>
:)
> >The > >
<<quoted lines omitted: 12>>
> there will be problem probably as we have no function available, which > checks for string pixel size ...)
USAGE: SIZE-TEXT face DESCRIPTION: Returns the size of the text in a face. SIZE-TEXT is a native value. ARGUMENTS: face -- (Type: object) make a dummy-face for arguments, put string in, voila.
> > > >That's a good idea. And yes I will add it. But it's an other way to > >work. This is more like the "normal" database pattern. > > > > > maybe you should wait if you are not sure about the idea .... >
[snip]
> -pekr-
-volker

 [13/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 14-Nov-2002 17:57


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 9>>
> 'loading 1mb takes some time, 'reading it is lots faster. if > you only load the currently displayed parts with load/next..
Sounds interesting but I didn't got it completely how your solution would look like. I need the Rebolized structure to make RFM work and I'm not sure if it make sense to keep a molded version just for search... Maybe if the number of objects is hughe.
> 2) user can search based on attributes. search for {user: > "Pe*}. then [find/reverse found > "<business-object-delemiter-tr449bz5>"] > load it and display in grid. (with switch to source ;) > with rebol-access and parse this could be interesting. > ;"tr449bz5": needs to be a unique string, not occuring in data.
Sorry, you lost me completely here :-|. Robert

 [14/16] from: gerardcote:sympatico:ca at: 17-Nov-2002 9:58


Hi Robert, I'll be back in one day or so, I now have completed my roof covering with success (and a great personal satisfaction) and there is only some housekeeping to do around my house. I plan to continue to support you developing your RFC as before by offering you my help to test and comment it as much as I will be able to. Regards, Gerard

 [15/16] from: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 17-Nov-2002 16:51


> -----Original Message----- > From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> great personal satisfaction) and there is only some > housekeeping to do around my house.
Hi, well than happy housekeeping ;-))
> I plan to continue to support you developing your RFC as > before by offering you my help to test and comment it as much > as I will be able to.
Great! I look forward for your comments, ideas and critics ;-)). Robert

 [16/16] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 17-Nov-2002 17:04


Robert M. Muench wrote:
>>-----Original Message----- >>From: [rebol-bounce--rebol--com] [mailto:[rebol-bounce--rebol--com]]
<<quoted lines omitted: 16>>
>> >Great! I look forward for your comments, ideas and critics ;-)). Robert
No, you all know that critics is pekr's domain ;-) Let others concentrate upon ideas :-) -pekr-

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted