David W. Fenton wrote: [snip]
If they are right, why wouldn't the problem take care of itself? Why cripple the old way in order to force people to use the new way?
That's a very good question, and one which I think the answer to involves more complexity than simple arbitrary restriction to 4 staff lists. I think there may be a programming issue where underlying changes in the way the program works might have made internal tracking or control of more than 4 staff lists difficult.
Absent a true programming need, there is no logical reason for such a limitation because any such change in the number of staff lists would have involved programming time which would better have been spent elsewhere.
-- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
