- Original Message -
From: "Malcolm Cadman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Quanta - Articles plea
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bruce N
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED
At 01:47 ìì 16/9/2002, you wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: "Malcolm Cadman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 5:47 PM
>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Quanta - Articles plea
>
>
> >
> &
t: Saturday, September 14, 2002 5:47 PM
>>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Quanta - Articles plea
>>
>>
>> >
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bruce N
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>> >
>> > >The next issue of Quanta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 5:47 PM
> >>Subject: Re: [ql-users] Quanta - Articles plea
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bruce
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Phoebus Dokos wrote:
> In essence you are including the second ">" within the url whereas you
> should leave it out. Turnpike (and any receiving mailer) correctly
> interprets the %3E as part of the url and feeds it to the browser...
> however there's no address that corre
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 at 15:27:33, Phoebus Dokos wrote:
(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
>>Certainly Turnpike, which slavishly follows internet conventions, and
>>very successfully I think, accepts these forms, and correctly linked the
>>quoted URL above.
>
>All of my mailers cannot handle the form of
??? 18/9/2002 4:51:49 ??, ?/? Dave P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??:
>
>
>
>On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Phoebus Dokos wrote:
>
>> In essence you are including the second ">" within the url whereas you
>> should leave it out. Turnpike (and any receiving mailer) correctly
>> interprets the %3E as part of the
