Subject: double line bug & nautical miles<br/>
Date: Nov 24, 2001 @ 01:27<br/>
Author: michael donner (michael donner &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="4633.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4638.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic4627.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="4635.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="4637.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-518765145">happily i can report it now appears from here that everyone else at bp is<br/>
looking just as gigantesque & doubly spacious as i myself am   & it is not<br/>
at all unpleasant  so i say lets just keep bloating & gloating along like<br/>
this<br/>
in the absence of any objections  m<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> &gt;anton has identified the new growth glitch or glitz as the double line bug<br/>
&gt;so i would like to see how far we can go without carriage returns & am<br/>
&gt;thus experimentally addressing you all  nonstop  but for horizontal spaces<br/>
&gt;&  yikes  so as to ease any accumulative tension would now adopt the<br/>
&gt;double or triple ampersand say like this &&& to mean a full stop & rest<br/>
&gt;&&&  &&&  let me also take this single continuous testing opportunity to<br/>
&gt;report some progress in my quest for the truest possible nautical mile<br/>
&gt;tho the received values continue to proliferate from exactly 6076 feet to<br/>
&gt;well beyond 6077 ft  for it does now appear that the most prestigious<br/>
&gt;authorities agree only upon exactly  6076 feet & 1 tenth  yes 6076point1<br/>
&gt;period  tho many others still variegate crazily into 4 decimal places  &&&<br/>
&gt;so i am content now to proceed with just this value into the wilds of<br/>
&gt;trigonometry if indeed there is anyone here who can lead me 3nm west thru<br/>
&gt;them from the mouth of the columbia to waorus  m </span></blockquote></div>