Re: source for artwork

[Sylvain <beuc@debian.org>]

Hi,

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 11:21:13AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> And here we are: There is no source *code* for art in general.

I guess that you do *not* recommend that we should accept any "art"
provided it's freely licensed, do you?

Use cases:
- a .ogg when there's unreleased MIDI+sound fonts
- still images when there's an original 3D model + textures + rendering params
- set of generated vertices when there's an high-level level editor + map
- huge all-bundled binary with no released tool to modify
- obfuscated BSD maze-generating Perl code
- digitalized version of non-digital artwork
- heavily and manually 2D-post-processed rendering of a 3D model

I've met quite a lot of the first 5 ones, far more editable with the
source forms; less of the last 2, admittedly hard to edit
independently of any source form.

There's a fuzzy general case, yes.  But more often than not nowadays,
pieces of art do have some level of source code.

-- 
Sylvain