Please do not mislead people into thinking that a discussion of syntax alone is of any value, *unless* there is a willingness on the part of those against the "@" syntax to compromise on a single alternative.

This statement seems a bit too strong, for the following reasons: 1. Adding @ impacts major external tools, negatively. 2. Adding @ is, in fact, a major change to the language. 3. The "willingness to compromise" is not really the driving force here: GvR is the only vote that matters. I have stated that Leo can probably live with the at sign. I have also stated elsewhere my reasons for not being particularly happy with it. For the record, I am +0 on the semantics. Edward -------------------------------------------------------------------- Edward K. Ream email: edreamleo@charter.net Leo: Literate Editor with Outlines Leo: http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html --------------------------------------------------------------------