Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
Raul Miller <email@example.com> writes:
> If you're saying that for the case where the font was generated by hand
> using a hex editor, the bitmap file itself is the source code. [And,
> perhaps not by chance, it was "the preferred form for making changes".]
Naw, because there are many equivalent file formats for a bitmap
font. I don't care which format it was edited in (that's why the GPL
definition loses here). *Any* non-lossy format for editing the bitmap
will do; perhaps it should be required that it's an open format.
Binary code, you see, is a lossy translation of the source code.
Source code contains a lot more information than the binaries do. By
contrast, alternative bitmap formats for a font generally all contain
exactly the same information, and it doesn't matter to me at all
which one is distributed.