Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: "Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 21:05:44 +0200
"Nikita the Spider" <NikitaTheSpider@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:NikitaTheSpider-0032CA.14044217072006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <e9gftq$gp1$02$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,<snip>
"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It was Timmermans who said it was depreciated. I know sometimes it gets
kind
of hard to follow who says what. Normally if it is somehow speaking about
fish and doobies it will be Fred.:-)
"Depreciated" is another matter entirely! I am not a tax accountant and
am therefore unqualified to comment. ;)
LOL! Ah, true. :-) I think I breathed to much bleach today from cleaning and
only 3 hours of sleep..:-)
Apologies to Fred; thanks to Stacey for the correction.
NP.:-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Big Bill
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- References:
- <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Paul
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: canadafred
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Timmermans
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Nikita the Spider
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Stacey
- Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- From: Nikita the Spider
- <b> tags vs bold CSS
- Prev by Date: Re: Amazing search tool
- Next by Date: Re: Amazing search tool
- Previous by thread: Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- Next by thread: Re: <b> tags vs bold CSS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|