> Yes.  It is not all wrong, but a few of them are incorrect (or, at
> the very least, misleading).  This error is perpetuated through
> several data sheets for many of the devices using the same
> hardware UART

I don't know why they persist with such a useless table. It seems
to emphasise the errors one can expect with a narrow range of
crystals and (because there's no example there with 0% error
all the way down) it almost implies to the uninitiated that RS232
can't be done on a PIC without error, when in fact there is a wide
range of common crystals to choose from to get 0% error at
any comms rate

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads