DDoc and @comments

[Jesse Phillips]

On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:18:16 +1100, Derek Parnell wrote:

> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 22:23:21 -0500, Ty Tower wrote:
> 
>> Read again and you will see I understand all the comments but re-read
>> the original post. It is intended to point out that there is a
>> correction needed there when someone gets around to doing it becaulse
>> DDoc does not produce accurate output in this regard
> 
> Dear Mr Tower,
> thank you for your kind interest in this subject. As you so rightfully
> pointed out there does need to be some corrections made, but as it
> happens to turn out, the correction must be applied to the documentation
> text and not DDoc itself. The current documentation, as was mentioned by
> others, is a legacy of the application being ported, and has not yet
> undergone conversion to the DDoc format. We apologize for this
> inconvenience and have noted it to be fixed as the earliest appropriate
> opportunity.
> 
> With respect, we reluctantly point out that DDoc is in fact producing
> correct output, given the input it has.
> 
> And by the way, all this was politely said to you before, only four
> hours after your initial post, by Mr Paul Findlay, so we are a little
> perplexed about your assertion that "I understand all the comments".
> 
> Thank for you again for your interest.
> 
> ==== MESSAGE ENDS ====

Derek,
I am sorry to say that reason does not work. If you wish there are a 
great many attempts in the digtialmars.dwt group, and thus I am only 
feeling sorry for those that attempt polite corrections to towers 
statements.