W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2007

Re: Another try at subclass

From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:39:24 +0100
Message-ID: <4767DB9C.9050109@ilog.fr>
To: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
CC: public-rif-wg@w3.org

Michael Kifer wrote:
> What is BLD++? Your proposal made no sense to me. You said that BLD should
> be BLD without classification and BLD++ should include it. In the above,
> however, you are saying that BLD should include everything that has already
> been specified. So, what do you mean by BLD++ now?

When I wrote "keep the BLD document complete with all that is already 
specified", I meant, "keep the document complete...", not BLD the 
dialect; sorry for the confusion.

The idea is to keep everything in a single document, and then define 
Core and one or more flavour of "BLD" as subsets of what is specified in 
the document (e.g. a dialect that contains no named argument Uniterms 
nor classification and that we could call BLD; another that contains 
everything specified in the document and that we could call BLD++)..

My understanding was that this would satisfying your sense of a profile, 
without the indirection problem that could complicate extensions (and it 
also seem that we have very different things in mind when we say 
extensions, but that is another subject).

Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2007 14:39:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:48 UTC