DDoc and @comments

[Derek Parnell]

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
(skype: derek.j.parnell)
Melbourne, Australia
3/03/2008 3:03:05 PM