W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2009

RE: [PRD] Refraction Semantics may be WRONG!

From: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:42:44 +0100
To: "Paul Vincent" <pvincent@tibco.com>
Cc: Changhai Ke <changhai.ke@fr.ibm.com>, "Gary Hallmark" <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>, mark.proctor@jboss.com, "neal Wyse" <neal.wyse@oracle.com>, "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>, public-rif-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFD8448178.847C546D-ONC1257672.0076FEDA-C1257672.00774622@fr.ibm.com>
"Paul Vincent" <pvincent@tibco.com> wrote on 18/11/2009 21:08:22:
> 
> ?So, PRD provides a syntactic way to differentiate between the 
> "loop" and "no-loop" cases, as exemplified by the modify_loop [1] 
> and modify_no-loop [2] test cases: they represent the same rule, 
> where the intended behaviour is to loop [1] or to refract [1]. ?

Ooops! Please, read: "... where the intended behaviour is to loop [1] or 
to refract [2]", of course.

> If this is the case then I agree RIF covers both semantics!
> 
> Thanks for the explanation.

British humor, I guess...

:-)

Christian

IBM
9 rue de Verdun
94253 - Gentilly cedex - FRANCE
Tel. +33 1 49 08 35 00
Fax +33 1 49 08 35 10


Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siège Social : 17 avenue de l'Europe, 92275 Bois-Colombes Cedex
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 609.751.783,30 ?
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 03644
Received on Wednesday, 18 November 2009 21:43:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 18 November 2009 21:43:28 GMT