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

Re: [PRD] ACTION-531 Update PRD examples complete

From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:08:59 +0200
Message-ID: <485FF4CB.1040506@ilog.fr>
To: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
CC: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Michael Kifer wrote:
> Everyone had an opportunity to suggest changes and improvements to the BLD
> syntax. In particular, the group has adopted several of your suggestions.
> So, saying that the BLD PS "has been designed without being reused for PRD in
> mind" is inaccurate.

I am curious: how do you infer that one had re-using BLD PS syntax for 
PRD in mind, from the premices that one contributed as one could to 
improve BLD PS syntax and that one never suggested any changes to make 
it more PRD friendly?

I mean, what makes you infer that rather than the contratry?

As it comes, having had a different PS syntax for PRD in mind all along, 
I did contribute to BLD PS without ever thinking of PRD!

> It is also hard to fail to notice that the original call to you to be
> compatible at the PS level came from PR people.

So what? Are there any more conclusions you can draw from that, than the 
true fact that "not all PR people agree on he issue"?

Btw, as far as I am concerned, the issue is rested until after PRD FPWD 
is published, since I understand that Gary agrees with my proposal.


Received on Monday, 23 June 2008 19:09:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:51 UTC