The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding

[Bent C Dalager]

In article <85ve9ov971.fsf at lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup  <dak at gnu.org> wrote:
>bcd at pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) writes:
>
>> In article <fdtsfu$iq6$03$1 at news.t-online.com>,
>> Frank Goenninger  <frgo at goenninger.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Well, I didn't start the discussion. So you should ask the OP about the 
>>>why. I jumped in when I came across the so often mentioned "hey, it's 
>>>all well defined" statement was brought in. I simply said that if that 
>>>"well-definedness" is against "common understanding" then I don't give 
>>>a damn about that clever definitions. Because I have to know that there 
>>>are such definitions - always also knowing that free is not really 
>>>free.
>>
>> "Liberated" is a valid meaning of the word "free".
>
>No.  It is a valid meaning of the word "freed".

Only if you're being exceedingly pedantic and probably not even
then. Webster 1913 lists, among other meanings,

Free
(...)
"Liberated, by arriving at a certain age, from the control
of parents, guardian, or master."

The point presumably being that having been "liberated", you are now
"free".


As I do not read gnu.misc.discuss, I reinstated the previous bunch.
Apologies to those who may be annoyed at this.

Cheers
	Bent D
-- 
Bent Dalager - bcd at pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
                                    powered by emacs