- From: Michael Steidl via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:27:47 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
* I prefer using the to be defined term as singular. So "Constraint/s Relation" or "Complex Constraint" - else people may wonder if more than one must be used. * The term Complex Constraint will raise questions about alternatives: what is a "Simple Constraint"? In general it would be good to introduce all variants of Constraint in the first part of 3.8. I suggest not using this term as it will make describing variants of constraints more complex ;-) * Rewording of what @riannella suggested and @simonstey questioned and the role of the operand was added: The variant _(or kind?)_ of Constraint entity called Constraint Relation MUST use a constraint as value for both the leftOperand and rightOperand. These two constraints MUST be atomic constraints, that is, not a constraint being a Constraint Relation. The operator sets the relationship. * ... I've taken out "_This variant supports more complex relationships between two constraints that needs to be compared and processed accordingly_." as there are (currently) no Constraints which support simple or less complex relationships between constraints. See my second bullet above. -- GitHub Notification of comment by nitmws Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/117#issuecomment-284978185 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2017 08:27:53 UTC