- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:39:14 +0100
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: heflin@cse.lehigh.edu, dlm@ksl.stanford.edu, ned.smith@intel.com, jeremy_carroll@hp.com, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, connolly@w3.org, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com, herman.ter.horst@philips.com, hendler@cs.umd.edu, www-archive@w3.org
[...] > I wonder also if > issues like being able to convey proofs for subsequent checking, and > the associated requirement that they stay checkable (one might call > it monotonicity of verifiability), should be thought of as a > requirement. my thoughts also *intersect* with that yes, "convey for checking" and "stay checkable" and those are testable! -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 10 December 2001 18:40:50 UTC