Re: Dots of gum?

From: Katharine Thayer ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 02/18/05-12:59:08 AM Z
Message-id: <>

Judy Seigel wrote:

> I don't think the issue is whether you're printing "dots" or their
> surround. That is, it's not the *shape*; it's the construction.

P.S. (Still on the same post I responded to earlier) Judy should get
some sort of prize because now that I have read through the rest of the
thread, I have to say I believe she is the only one who actually got
the point I was making; everyone else just responded using the same
assumption I was calling into question, that it's the dots that print,
which of course is not the case; it's the areas around the dots that
print, not the dots themselves.
Received on Mon Feb 21 12:07:46 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 03/01/05-02:06:55 PM Z CST