I don't understand this reply—it doesn't disagree with anything I said. If Tolkien publishes intentional changes, they are some form of canon, even if it's of t

I don't understand this reply—it doesn't disagree with anything I said. If Tolkien publishes intentional changes, they are some form of canon, even if it's of the "Han shot first" variety. Tolkien changing the words on page 527 is new canon. If the publisher modifies the work particularly in a manner devoid of creative intent—such as unintentionally omitting page 527—the modification cannot possibly be considered canonical. Imperfections in an emulator are not the work of the original author and they're certainly not any form of artistic intent.