What do you do when you've posted something on your blog and when you read it again just a few days later your thinking has evolved significantly and it no longer reflects what you really want to say? Do you edit your original post or do you write another post contradicting the first one?
I'm opting for contradicting my earlier post titled "THE END." This is happening partly as a result of watching Jay Cross and Dave Bray talking about unbooks, and partly because in the process of making "final" revisions to version 1.0 of my manuscript, I am already considering future revisions and getting a better understanding of the current status of my manuscript.
My earlier post titled "THE END" was all about the exhilaration of writing the two words at the end of a manuscript, declaring that the story was all there and readable. At the time, I called it FINISHED. That is where my thinking has evolved and where I can clarify. Version 0.9 is finished but will not be published. Version 1.0 is the version that will be published. It will be a finished version 1.0, not necessarily the final version of the manuscript.
In other words, even if you see your manuscript as an unfinished product, there are finished versions that become published versions. And then at some point there will be a final version even if it is still an unfinished product.