Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 03:11:47PM -0500, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>> I think with these examples you're getting away from the "preferred >> form for making modifications" definition of source. > > Yes, I'm accepting "or as close as is physically possible". Note that > I'm not including "economically possible" or "politically possible". I > can easily defend relaxing restrictions enough to accomodate physical > laws of the universe; I cannot do so to accomodate somebody else's > profit margin. But I don't think you need to relax the restrictions at all to accommodate this example. >> But if I were to take a picture of lightning and decide I >> wanted a slightly different picture, it seems I'd either edit the jpeg >> (possibly bitmap, but I don't see the point of making that source in >> most cases) or take a new picture. > > That example was carefully selected. You don't *get* another chance to > take a picture of a lightning bolt. They only last a second or two, > and every one is unique. That photo is the only one that will ever > exist. (jpeg-compressed is no good when a non-lossy format is > available, though). I see the "preferred form" definition of source as suggesting a thought experiment. For example, I, a novice photographer, take a picture of a lightning bolt (assuming I can do this, as a novice photographer) to include in part of my splash screen for my new game. Later I decide I want a slightly different picture. What do I do? I'd probably either take a new picture or I edit the jpeg. If so, I'd argue that either the jpeg is source, or nothing is necessary for source. You can't simply decide that, for X kind of work, Y is always the correct source -- even if you then make allowances for physical impossibilities. You have to look at (for one thing, at least*) what the author would actually *do*. It's a question of fact, as I mentioned elsewhere. * I haven't yet decided whether there might be cases where the author is so crazy/nasty that his opinion isn't the deciding one. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
