Re: Defining 'preferred form for making modifications'
tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> Precisely when the xcf is the exact source of the actual gif in
> question. If the gif has been modified on its own, then the source is
> now the combination of both the xcf and the gif.
Would you agree that there could come a point where the gif has been
modified enough that the .xcf is no longer relevant source? While I
wouldn't say this about a binary, I do think it's reasonable in the
case of an image. The analogy of program used to create the image to
language used to create a binary breaks down because the boundaries
are harder in the case of programming languages.
If an original image was created from a .xcf, but for the next 10
years all edits (and we'll assume there are plenty) were done directly
to the gif, it seems reasonable to leave out the .xcf at some point.
Obviously, how much is enough would be a big question mark, and it
isn't reasonable to expect everyone to agree on exactly where that
line falls, especially in the abstract. That's why we have judges,
after all.
--
Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
Reply to: