FLD says "All logic-based RIF dialects are required to be derived from RIF-FLD by specialization" and several variants of that notion appear elsewhere in FLD and UCR (and possibly elsewhere, that I didn't notice). I don't really undertand what this constraint is trying to do. Is it a promise that all future logic dialects from RIF-WG *will* use FLD? Is it some kind of constraint on vendor extensions? I don't think it's right for us to say either one here. I'm fine with conveying expectation, like: "Logic-based RIF dialects are expected to be derived from RIF-FLD by specialization". Okay? -- SandroReceived on Sunday, 25 May 2008 14:21:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:49 GMT