Re: Proposal - Statement that Sarge will follow Woody requirement for main.
On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 11:27:12AM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote:
> So, trying again, how about "the same criterion that were applied prior
> to GR 2004_003?" Does this avoid assuming the changes to the social
> contract were not editorial in nature?
Note that "editorial in nature" is largely irrelevant.
Editors can change the meaning of the texts they edit.
Also, in my opinion, the change served to eliminate ambiguity (and, thus
alternatives) -- there's no contradction there. [Though I suppose you
could argue that now that the ambiguity has been eliminated the prior
revision of the social contract should be read as if that ambiguity were