[Ffmpeg-cvslog] CVS: ffmpeg/libavcodec avcodec.h, 1.393, 1.394ffv1.c, 1.32, 1.33 g726.c, 1.5, 1.6 h263.c, 1.279, 1.280 huffyuv.c, 1.61, 1.62 mpeg12.c, 1.235, 1.236 mpegvideo.c, 1.480, 1.481 snow.c, 1.60, 1.61

Måns Rullgård mru
Tue May 10 00:04:38 CEST 2005

The Wanderer <inverseparadox at comcast.net> writes:

> M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> The Wanderer <inverseparadox at comcast.net> writes:
>>> Phew. That got a little long.
>>> M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>>>> What gives you the authority to say whether or not something is a
>>>> word?
>>> ...that opens up an entire completely separate semi-philosophical
>>> discussion, which you almost certainly did not mean to address, and
>>>  which definitely does not belong on this list. Rather than embark
>>> on that tangent, I'll limit my response to three points.
>>> One, as indicated by the use of the phrase "I don't think", the
>>> above is represents my own experience and - to the extent relevant
>>> - opinion; if I'd intended it as an absolute decree that "'X' is
>>> not a word", I'd have phrased it that way.
>> There's really not much point in discussing opinions on whether or
>> not some particular combination of letters forms a word.  Either it
>> is, or it isn't, and any debate on the subject would have to be based
>> around verifiable facts backing the arguments brought forth.
> True; that is why I listed "opinion" as potentially irrelevant. As a
> datapoint, however, as well as a potential indicator of what would and
> would not be viewed as valid by the reading audience, my experience may
> well have some bearing; this was roughly the intended thrust of the
> above sentence.

If you had cared to mention what this experience might be made up of,
I would possibly have given your opinion stronger weight.

>>> Two, unlike many (though certainly not all) posting members of
>>> these lists, I am a native speaker of English;
>> As am I, at least to some extent, despite my name.
> Okay; I based the presumption that you weren't on the TLD from which you
> post, though now that I look at it more closely I actually have no idea
> what language(s) is (are) spoken there. Apologies.

Does .com have any geographic connotations these days?  Or were you
thinking of .cx?  That's the Christmas Island, to which I have never
been, and know nothing about.  In case you're curious, I am presently
in Norway, and no, English is not an official language here.

>>> this does not necessarily trump dictionaries (though see below),
>>> but it does give me a certain limited authority (excuse me) on the
>>> subject.
>> I'd tend to agree.
>> [discussion on dictionary philosophy]
>> I totally agree.
> Good to hear; many people (some reasonable, some not) have differed with
> me on the issue, so it's nice to find someone reasonable who doesn't.

Good to hear someone call me reasonable.

>> It is evident that "unofficial" is by far the more common
>> form. However, seeing that "inofficial" is listed as a separate
>> entry in the 1913 edition of Webster's Dictionary, one could make
>> the conclusion that "unofficial" has, since the publication of said
>> dictionary, risen in popularity, and come to virtually replace
>> "inofficial", possibly in a manner contrary to your prescriptivist
>> dictionary view.  I do not, however, have any evidence to back such
>> a theory.
> Yes, some of the same things occurred to me, which is why I didn't press
> harder in response to your final citation. I'm not wholly immune to
> refutation by external evidence, except when I specifically decide to
> be. ^_^

Seems like we share more than one trait.

>> Now let's get back to coding instead.  There it is so much easier to
>> say what is right and what is not.
> ...which, since it doesn't get anything changed, conveniently leaves the
> side you were arguing for as 'winning' by default... but okay, I'll drop
> the subject, for at least the time being.

Well, in the end it's Michael's call.  Whichever way he decides, I
won't argue.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mru at inprovide.com

More information about the ffmpeg-cvslog mailing list