From cowan@ccil.org Sun Oct 04 12:37:19 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MuWtO-0001NB-Us for llg-board@lojban.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:37:19 -0700 Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MuWtJ-0003AA-Hv; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 15:37:09 -0400 Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:37:09 -0400 To: Arnt Richard Johansen Cc: llg-board@lojban.org, John Cowan Subject: [llg-board] Re: "Community edited version" of CLL uploaded to the wiki Message-ID: <20091004193709.GA21532@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20091004134024.GA3835@nvg.org> <4AC8C7F4.4060002@lojban.org> <20091004170556.GC3835@nvg.org> <20091004172217.GD3835@nvg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091004172217.GD3835@nvg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: John Cowan X-archive-position: 572 X-Approved-By: arj@nvg.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: cowan@ccil.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board Arnt Richard Johansen scripsit: > Someone called "remod" on both IRC and the wiki have uploaded a > version of the CLL that is based on the draft reference grammar with > the approved errata incorporated, but does not "clearly mark" the > modifications, as required by the licence. I have seen it. > Remod claims to have discussed this "in the chat" with Robin and John, > and come to some sort of understanding. Do you have any recollection > of this? Remod pointed me to a place where I could download the PDF. I did so, and examined it. From what I understand (though I have not checked this claim in detail), it has been painstakingly collated with the printed text, hence the reference to a "community edition", referring to the collaborative proofreading effort. While I think this fact should be noted on the introductory page, I do not see that it serves any purpose whatsoever to painstakingly note all the several hundred differences between the HTML and the PDF, most of which amount to corrections of obvious slips or typos. As the author I firmly approve of the existence of an electronic edition of CLL. I do not think that allowing it to circulate at this late date will damage hardcopy sales, and it may even help them -- there is some anecdotal evidence to this effect[1]. I note that the first page actually encourages this. I urge the Board to get the first page changed to acknowledge the connection to the print edition, and then make the PDF an authorized edition. [1] http://baen.com/library/home.htm -- If I read "upcoming" in [the newspaper] John Cowan once more, I will be downcoming http://www.ccil.org/~cowan and somebody will be outgoing. cowan@ccil.org