On 16/10/2007, RLS <evendell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/15/07, Ron Ritzman
<ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/15/07, Gwern Branwen
<gwern0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Now now. Let's be fair: it *could* have been
a null edit.
If a "null edit" is what I think it is then shouldn't the summary be
"didn't make a change"?
I think the point is "made a change" tells us it *wasn't* a null edit. :)
Indeed. The summary contained 1 bit (as in, binary digit) of
information. Not completely useless, but as close as you can get
without being.
I think "minor edit"[1] is beyond useless. I mean, there's a check-box
for saying that.
[1] e.g.