searchop vs. op

[Aaron Turner <aturner@linuxkb.org>]

Hey Jason I remember that searchop was going to be what Search.pm uses
instead of op, because you were going to do something with op that I
didn't want to parse out in Search.pm.

But now, for the life of me I can't figure why I didn't like it. :)

Jason, I'm thinking that maybe you changed how op worked again?  I think
the bad part has been moved into &history.  Is &op=a.b.c.d.e
where a,b,c,d,e are integers and match up with the current place in the
KBObjects tree?  If so, we can get rid of searchop.

Trying to make things easier and the world safe for penguins...

--
Aaron Turner, Core Developer       http://vodka.linuxkb.org/~aturner/
Linux Knowledge Base Organization  http://linuxkb.org/
Because world domination requires quality open documentation.
aka: aturner@vicinity.com, aturner@pobox.com, ion_beam_head@ashtech.net