Re: Datatyping desiderata, take 2

At 01:34 PM 1/17/02 +0100, Martyn Horner wrote:
>I'd suggest you condense the redundant items in the desiderata list (it
>seems to me also that 7 restates 5 and 6 (rather than 4 and 5) and that
>4 follows from 3) - before we start using these item numbers to score
>off the proposals.

I hope we're not going to get into scoring systems... ;-)

I'll look into what you suggest, but I would like to keep the DAML+OIL 
joint committee text fairly intact, at least until we are reasonably sure 
we're talking about the same things.

I'm also trying to be very careful that I don't combine things because they 
look the same under some assumption that I hold.

>Also, I lost the point of the list of idiom examples: idiom B and idiom
>P are shown to be the same (modulo prefix). Have I missed something?

No, you didn't miss anything.  I didn't merge them (yet) in case some 
idiomatic differences between B and P emerge in subsequent discussions.  I 
think there might be some more complex combinations of statements that 
don't work in the same way under those proposals.

#g


--------------------------
        __
       /\ \    Graham Klyne
      /  \ \   (GK@ACM.ORG)
     / /\ \ \
    / / /\ \ \
   / / /__\_\ \
  / / /________\
  \/___________/