Re: [Bug 11716] Identity constraints: grammatical typo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen writes:

> Thanks for the clarification.  I think 'exactly' does no work in the sentence,
> so I don't think it's a loss.  (As a test:  what would a node set look like if it 
> had inexactly one node?)

It has two nodes.

>> Thanks, that's helpful.  Certainly my _intent_ in offering new wording
>> was not to change 'set' vs. 'sequence' anywhere -- if I have done so
>> inadvertently please correct it.
>
> No comment on your wording was intended; when I sat back to
> think about the problem reported, I realized that I couldn't understand
> anything at all in the constraint being revised.  Until I have a better idea
> (i.e. some idea) of what we would like to say, I am not ready to
> propose or evaluate any proposals for wording.

 . . .

>> Indeed, not a new problem.  Still might be worth fixing, IMO.
>
> I agree; certainly worth doing, since they are the issue raised by the 
> OP in the bug report.

Fair enough -- see also MK's recent comment, which I will reply to.

ht
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFNLbfukjnJixAXWBoRAoqfAJ0VLg+Re6PmFjvEUMMcsqladfkumQCbB+ni
ALhsq66WWTzs2Ry9QLGd6VY=
=dY5c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Wednesday, 12 January 2011 14:18:40 UTC