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 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]