Re: CLARIFICATION: Help with timing issues

[Matthias.Apitz@SOFTCON.de (Matthias Apitz)]

Ivan Kohler wrote:
    
    >    >
    >    >BTW: If you have looked through all of the documentation did you
    >    >notice that the spelling is ``HylaFAX'' and not HYLAFAX and also not
    >    >hylafax or anything else?
    >    
    >    Hello matthias,
    >    
    >    While I and others appriciate you taking the time to answer questions
    about
    >    HylaFAX (yes, I spelled and capitialized it correctly)... does it really
    >    matter?
    >
    >HylaFAX is software. Writing, solving problems and debugging
    >this and other software start allways with understanding the bits
    >of this software. The bits of the word HylaFAX and hylafax are
    >very different (don't know if my bad English let you understand
    >my point that I mean precision with the word "bit"). That's also
    >why one should provide correct and precise information (like version,
    >type of operating system, trace-files, command line arguments etc.)
    >if one is asking for help or complaining about bugs. None of
    >this information was included in the original email of David.
    >I had a private email discussion with David and it later showed
    >up that he is using the old version v3.0 and my hint about hfaxd(1M)
    >was wrong (there was no hfaxd(1M) in v3.0)). Take this for an
    >example that without precise information in the question every answer
    >maybe wrong or useless.
    >
    >Despide of this HylaFAX(tm) is a trademark,
    
    I agree.  I've done my share of RTFM'ing and telling people to RTFM.  I'm
    just saying that there is absolutely no reason to be anal (uptight) about
    how people spell, capitalize and punctuate HylaFAX or hylafax or HYLAFAX or
    _hYlA-fAx_.

I'm not and I was not uptight - as you can see in the last sentence of
Q1 of the just released new HylaFAQ :-)

	matthias