Re: Anton's amendment
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:32:17PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> If your proposal is as Manoj construed it, a proposal to modify the
> DFSG, then I agree it is not ad hoc.
>
> But if it is a proposal to *interpret* the *existing* DFSG, then the
> *interpretation* is ad hoc.
The text of my proposal clearly states that it is not a proposal to
modify the DFSG. It is not even a proposal to interpret the existing
DFSG. It makes some of the existing interpretations of DFSG invalid
but it doesn't suggest which interpretation is the right.
Anton Zinoviev
Reply to: