|
cthu1hu 2008-02-04 12:09 someone needs to right a script that converts styles to the new syntax. hint hint. j/k ;)
crowmag 2008-02-04 10:59 @ArthurDent: I thought that way at first but then I realized that the 0.7x syntax offers a great deal more latitude with borders which can provide a lot of nuance and detail unavailable in the 0.6x syntax. But, to each their own... It did take me some time to develope a set of templates that were accurate and complete and I guess most people just want to start a style without a lot of hassle bc the whole point is that it is both creative and relaxing to do :D
doctorfrog 2008-02-04 10:03 there's a .7 syntax?
ArthurDent 2008-02-04 05:10 I can tell you that I don't use 0.70 syntax for a couple reasons. One is none of the styles I have are .7 so when I make a new one I start with a basis that isn't .7. The other reason is that the .7 changes were unnecessary and more complicated than they needed to be.
unkamunka 2008-02-04 01:05 could one of the reasons that "nobody is writing 0.70 syntax" folks are using bbStyleMaker - at least as a drafting tool?
XZero450 2008-02-03 18:54 I'm too lazy to update my styles, well lazy and I just don't have a whole lot of time I get to just sit down and take a deep breath. =) ..but I don't speak for everyone..
cyeh 2008-02-03 16:44 i see a lot of usable styles; too bad nobody is writing 0.70 syntax! although i also noticed that almost all of you are running microsoft software
mini-man 2008-01-31 05:22 partly =P
crowmag 2008-01-30 17:45 Didn't noccy throw that handle on you m-m?
/\/\inimal 2008-01-30 14:10 FYI: well thanks to tresni I'm changing my nick to mini-man, since I use that most often now everywhere. :D
|
|
|