On 9 Feb 95 07:24pm, ROB STADT wrote to TORRE FOOTE:
TF>>RP> would be nice in some instances, but I don't know if it should be
TF>> More than just nice to have, but an absolute neccessity if you are
TF>> planning on exchanging data in a standardized format such as Electronic
TF>> Data Interchange (EDI) documents conforming to the Uniform Code Council
TF>> (UCC) standards.
 RS> Yes, you got my message Torre, thats what I ment
 RS> Torre, you made my day!
 RS> I hope that we got a lot of support in our opinion, that PFW will loose
 RS> a lot of users if the developpers do not take notice of this extremely
Rob:
Not really a difference of opinion, as it turns out, more of an expanded
definition of the problem.  Bob Pardoe and several others have chimed in on
this topic, and it is turning out to be be a fairly lively discussion (see
related messages).  One member even asked for details on how to contact the
UCC and another seems to have already implemented an EDI solution via
PdoxWin!  The wealth of information and participation here on the echo never
ceases to intrigue me.
 RS> Thanks, and regards from the Netherlands, Rob
 RS> PS. Its not as bad here as the media tell you. My feet are still dry.
Try here in San Francisco, Land of Contradictions (21 straight days of rain,
floods, and mudslides and the authorities are *still* trying to convince us
that there is a drought.)
--Torre
 * Silver Xpress V4.00P SW12473
--- TMail v1.31.5
---------------