In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

when a user can modify an image and change it later, it's reversible
and that's why it's called a non-destructive workflow.

Fine, fine. If you wear a reversible jacket do call it, too, a
non-destructive work flow?

Of course not. There are several subtly different meanings to the word
'reversible' and you seem to have only learned one of them.

floyd would be the one who has only learned one of them.

everything in a non-destructive workflow is reversible. that's the
whole *point* and why it's so useful.

It's your point, but it wasn't Floyds and it's not what I want to
discuss. Why don't you shut up? You may learn something.

tell that to floyd.

he knows nothing about non-destructive workflows or how they work,
going so far to say that they are for cartoon characters.

if anyone needs to learn something, it's him.