Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader


I wrote:

As it is, I'm suggesting that 0x80 0x82 is equal to precisely onestring, namely 0x80 0x20,


Ack! Typo. 0x80 0x82 both time, of course

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Philip Guenther Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Michael Haardt Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Alexey Melnikov Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Alexey Melnikov Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Philip Guenther Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Alexey Melnikov Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Arnt Gulbrandsen Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Michael Haardt Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Arnt Gulbrandsen Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Arnt Gulbrandsen <= Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Michael Haardt Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Mark E. Mallett Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Philip Guenther Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Ned Freed Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Michael Haardt Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Ned Freed Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Kjetil Torgrim Homme Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Ned Freed Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Kjetil Torgrim Homme Re: document status: 3028bis, body, editheader, Ned Freed