Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: blmblm@myrealbox.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.help Subject: Re: How far back can we go? Date: 30 Aug 2011 14:28:14 GMT Organization: None Lines: 55 Message-ID: <9c4abuF2e1U1@mid.individual.net> References: <4e58a696$0$828$e4fe514c@dreader28.news.xs4all.nl> <9c1rhlFn25U1@mid.individual.net> <254b4302-0ed5-48cb-9c6f-4a6fd13fa369@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> X-Trace: individual.net Akk1QTORUJojL9429rs/SQ66CwZMKAxQbCs9WfaGjx8ZgaoP57 X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:gig3B0M3qJPUhkaJZLaoXNJRxMo= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.help:989 In article <254b4302-0ed5-48cb-9c6f-4a6fd13fa369@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com>, Lew wrote: > On Monday, August 29, 2011 9:03:01 AM UTC-7, blmblm @ myrealbox. com wrote: > > In article , > > Lew wrote: > > > blmblm @ myrealbox. com wrote: > > > > Lew wrote: > > > >> If the books were good, they've been updated and you can use the new > > > >> editions. > > > > > > > > I'm far from convinced that the correlation between quality and > > > > updates is as strong as you seem to be saying it is. It seems to > > > > me that whether a book gets updated depends not so much on quality > > > > as on whether the author is interested in doing an update and the > > > > publisher is interested in publishing it. ? [ snip ] > > > So our disagreement rests on the definition of "quality". It may > > > have been a great book in its day, but if that day doesn't help > > > this day then it's no longer a great book by the pragmatic > > > definition of, "What has it done for me lately?" > > > > Well, no, with all due respect I don't think that's at all the point > > I was trying to make. You said "if the books *were* [emphasis mine] > > good, they've been updated", and that's what I'm skeptical about -- > > whether a lack of updates necessarily indicates that the book wasn't > > very good to begin with. > > My comment was not the past tense but in the conditional tense. Probably my addition of emphasis didn't make this especially clear, but I think that's exactly how I interpreted it -- I understood you to mean "if the books had ever been good, then they would have been updated". > Example, "If you were a grammar freak, you would know the > conditional tense." A grammar freak as opposed to a pedantic prescriptivist with very little knowledge of formal grammatical rules? :-) (I had to look up "conditional tense", it not being a term I recognize.) > Understandable confusion, but the lead-in "if" is a good clue. > > Regardless, I agree with your point that the books may have had good > quality for their now-irrelevant context. > > -- > Lew > Oh, would that people still used the subjunctive! -- B. L. Massingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.