Bj”rn,   
       
   BF> I would suggest adding an ;E line as the second line for every segment   
   BF> (ZC, RC and NC). That way we can track all the segments, down to the net   
   BF> ones, and spot possible problems. But that, of course, is just my two   
   BF> cents worth of opinion...   
       
   I don't see why an ";E"-line should be prefered.   
       
   BF>WD> If there is one, then please educate me.   
       
   BF> The check sum.   
       
   You fail to convince me ...   
       
   If that comment line is inserted at the end for example and included in the   
   checksum, I don't see what the problem is.   
       
   The checksum is valid at my level for the file that I produce with the   
   software that I use. The fact that someone else with a different software not   
   inserting such a comment-line gets a different checksum is irrelevant.   
       
   We're discussing makenl_ng here, not NLMAINT or NLMAKE or whatever it might   
   be. The advantage of getting the comment-line is staring everyone in the face   
   who is involved in nodelist-production.   
       
    \%/@rd   
      
   --- D'Bridge 3.9   
    * Origin: Many Glacier / Protect - Preserve - Conserve (2:292/854)