[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Version" Aversion
- To: <bobp>, <mark>
- Subject: Re: "Version" Aversion
- From: Michael McClary <michael>
- Date: Sat, 16 Dec 89 01:25:52 PST
- Cc: <xanatech>
> From bobp Fri Dec 15 15:00:15 1989
> I like Ravi's "edition" suggestion a lot, and plan to incorporate
> it into my work. And while "variation" doesn't deliver quite
> the persusasive impact that "edition" packs, I'm reasonably happy
> with it in the absence of a better suggestion. However, I agree
> with you that we should try and avoid using the term "version"
> to reference both "editions" and "variations". I say "try" because
> I have very little confidence in our ability to moderate the
> habitual abuse "version" receives, either internally or externally.
I suggest "variant" rather than "variation" when referring to the
document/bert identity. "Variation" connotes the pure differences
and/or the act of applying the differences to make a variant, more
strongly than it connotes the variant edition itself.