W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > June 2008

RE: DTB and BLD Use Cases: User-Defined Functions -- factorial example, Equal in the head, oriented equations, left and right roles

From: Boley, Harold <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:03:17 -0400
Message-ID: <E4D07AB09F5F044299333C8D0FEB45E904FFE154@nrccenexb1.nrc.ca>
To: "Christian de Sainte Marie" <csma@ilog.fr>
Cc: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
It was three to three, and if we continue to "leave as is"
(there apparently is no RESOLVED), we cannot define
user functions with oriented equations -- evidence that
I found after F2F10 and emailed to the Tuesday telecon
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jun/0046.html):



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/F2F10_Minutes#Naming

 

Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : Equal
roles should be left and right 

Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : <Equal>
should have <left> and <right> not side and side. [Scribe assist by
Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> ]

Christian de Sainte Marie
<http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Christian_de_Sainte_M
arie&action=edit> : is symmetric 

Harold Boley
<http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Harold_Boley&action=e
dit> : prefer not to go back to left and right 

Dave Reynolds <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Dave_Reynolds> : +1 on
left/right being (slightly) better

Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : do not
want to get your rules back from RIF with equalities flipped 

Chris Welty <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Chris_Welty> : discussion
was that equality is symmetric, and we didn't want to force people to
choose left and right 

PROPOSED: shall we switch from Equal/side/side to Equal/left/right ? 

Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : leave it
as is: three
Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : changing
it: Jos, Sandro, (dave reynolds)
Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : I'm
willing to drop it on the graounds that it's a lot of work to change.
[Scribe assist by Sandro Hawke
<http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> ]

leave as is

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Working on other BLD updates, I found that it would not
be much work to change. I would be willing to do this small,
reasonable change (also in the XSD) before more test cases
(so far only factorial.rif) etc. would make it hard to implement.

Hence my proposal.

Best,
Harold


-----Original Message-----
From: Christian de Sainte Marie [mailto:csma@ilog.fr
<mailto:csma@ilog.fr> ]
Sent: June 12, 2008 5:00 AM
To: Boley, Harold
Cc: Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)
Subject: Re: DTB and BLD Use Cases: User-Defined Functions -- factorial
example, Equal in the head, oriented equations, left and right roles

Boley, Harold wrote:
>
> Here's the current XML syntax (with proposed differentiation
> of <side> into <left> and <right> indicated as XML comments):

Re <side> VS <left>+<right>: I thought that had been discussed and
settled during F2F10 (to leave as it is, that is: <side>)?

Cheers,

Christian
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2008 13:04:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:49 GMT