In a message dated 8/2/03 2:54:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


<<Piping up here... You _can not_ have it as a binary file.  We went
through this with PCGen, everything is in data files for that very
reason.  Human Readable is the criteria.  _javascript_ is okay, it's not a
compiled language.  Text files that drive the engine are fine (ala
PCGen) are fine.  Compiled binary code is not.
>>


Many word processing document formats are  binary files and not text files.  I can't read them directly -- they aren't human readable directly.

I used to, for kicks, try to open binaries up with powerful text readers to see what was inside to see what binary files looked like when I was a kid and first learned how to program.  Most weren't very human readable at all.

I can only read what is displayed in such a file when a particular piece of software is used to open them.  Even then I do _NOT_ see the entirety of the binary -- I see only what the software used to open the binary intends for me to see, and nothing more.

With a binary computer program, you can't read the binary directly, but instead you can only see what the program intends for you to see.  I see precious little difference to be honest.

There might be a difference if you tried to declare part of a binary as OGC and part as PI.  But if the whole thing is 100% OGC then there's no requirement that everyone be able to read it, there's no requirement that it be 100% human readable "as is", and there's not even any requirement that the output be human readable.

In fact some potential types of OGC are not human readable at all.  I can copyright my voice making unusual sounds.  As a copyright holder I can declare it as OGC (another list member raised this point).  Those vocalizations are not "human readable", but if they are 100% OGC then then it is still _very_ clear to me what is OGC and what is PI: everything is OGC.


Lee

Reply via email to