XPost: rec.photo.digital 
  
 In news.groups Alan Browne  wrote: 
 > andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote: 
 >> 
 >> I don't have a personal definition of reflex.  However, I do know that 
 >> it doesn't require exchangeable lenses.  SLR is a very old term -- 
 >> consider the Noviflex 6x6, one of the very first SLRs.  And it 
 >> originally had a fixed lens. 
  
 > A fine exception.  I'm sure you can find others. 
  
 Plenty, I suspect.  But a single example is sufficient. 
  
 > Not exactly up to date. 
  
 I can find a much more recent example.  :-) 
  
 > See the proposed charter and its definition of SLR.  That is the 
 > commonly accepted definition of SLR... it need not encompass every 
 > exception back to the first slr. 
  
 You're saying that this previously well-defined technical term no 
 longer means what it used to mean. 
  
 That's an interesting contention.  Certainly, some people consider 
 cameras like the E20 to be SLRs and some do not.  I could point to the 
 history of the term and its definition to show that it is, in fact, an 
 SLR. 
  
 Your argument seems to be based on the notion that "SLR" has acquired 
 a new meaning through common use.  I do not accept this, but clearly 
 there is nothing to be gained by arguing such a point.  However, you 
 should perhaps consider that basing a charter on a rather contentious 
 definition is not the ideal starting point for a newsgroup. 
  
 Andrew. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)