Re: Value type constraints

> On 30 Mar 2015, at 06:17, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo <jelabra@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I am now quite convinced by your argument that anything under "complex constraints" should be "stuff addressable only via extensions" (but that's for a different discussion…)

I suspect you meant “not quite convinced” but wrote “now quite convinced”?

I didn’t make an argument about the meaning of that section. I asked some weeks ago what the meaning of that section is (at the F2F I think), and that was the response I got, although it was acknowledged that most of the WG was probably unaware of this intention.

Richard

Received on Monday, 30 March 2015 08:24:35 UTC