[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Non-source Javascript files in upstream source



Quoting Holger Levsen (2014-05-03 15:26:37)
> On Samstag, 3. Mai 2014, Ben Finney wrote:
>>> care to explain the difference?
>> We're not interested in what form a *modification* takes (if it even 
>> makes sense to talk about a “form of modification”, which doesn't 
>> seem coherent in the context). We're interested in what form of the 
>> *work* is the source form.
>> 
>> That is, to answer the question “what is the source form of the 
>> work”, we need a definition that answers in terms of “such-and-so 
>> form of the work”.
>> 
>> To answer that question, an answer that talks about “form of 
>> modification” doesn't line up; at least, I can't make it coherent 
>> without changing the wording.
>
> thanks for the explaination, even though I cannot make much sense out 
> of it ;)
>
> I appreciate there seems to be a huge difference for native english 
> speakers, but to me, “preferred form of modification” equals "he 
> preferred form of the work for making modifications to it".

"form of modification": How it is modified.

"form for modification": That which is modified.

We care about form of source, not form of modification [to source].


> And since it's shorter and appearantly many other people don't seem to 
> get the difference, "preferred form of modification” in my book has 
> become a standing expression, which most people seem to get righ.

Replace "of" with "for" and it is (not identical to other texts arguably 
perfected via lawyers, but) correct english.

I sure hope it is not a single character that feels too heavy ;-)


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: