[projectaon] Re: Comment Period for Lone Wolf 1-7
- From: Chris Neilson <crusty.chris@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:21:13 +1300
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 14:54 -0700, Jonathan Blake wrote:
> > 79: They incorporated our footnote as a separate paragraph.
>
> I'd say leave it as a footnote because we're preserving the original
> text better that way. If someone has some arguments for going the
> other way, please share.
it seems to me that footnotes are problematic in their current
implementation (you cant refer multiple links to the same footnote, they
dont display well in the simple format etc).
I think that anywhere we can drop a footnote would be better.
My personal opinion is that the purpose of the Project Aon versions
should not be to preserve the original text so much as preserve the
authors intentions. This means:
- fixing spelling/grammar
- clarifying rules when we are 100% certain what was intended (eg via
clarifications in newsletters, Magnamund Companion guide or other cannon
material)
- noting rule ambiguity, my preference being to refer to an external
work like The Reader's Handbook for issues with multiple viewpoints
rather than cluttering up the work with HUGE footnotes trying to cover
every case ("blah blah blah is unclear, use your own judgement or refer
to xyz for possible interpretations" is all we need)
Personally I consider Mongoose modifications cannon as I understand they
were made with consultation with Dever (or he at least OKed the
changes).
So in this particular situation we know that 1) Dever saw that the
section needed clarification and 2) He saw fit to include it in the main
body (as opposed to a change in the rules section). With the added
benefit on our side that we no longer need to maintain a footnote which
will make the rule clarification available to ALL formats we publish.
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
