- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 08:50:40 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
> > From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu> > Subject: Re: A proposal for a unitary RIF phase 1 > Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 04:00:10 -0400 > > > > > > > > > Even though this might seem unnecessary in > > > > the unitary world, this same rule set will have to live in a Phase 2 > > > > world with other semantics, so it must be prepared to declare its > > > > characteristics in that larger context. > > > > > > Well, this assumes, for starters, that there will be other, divergent, > > > semantics in Phase 2. I do not conceed this point. However, even if this > > > were the case, how do divergent semantics in Phase 2 require divergent > > > semantics in Phase 1? > > > > I didn't say that Phase 1 will necessarily have multiple semantics. > > I said that Phase 1 must already have a plan for Phase 2. > > I don't see how this follows. Yes, Phase 1 should be performed in a way > that should not make Phase 2 too much harder, but this is certainly much > less than a full plan for Phase 2. I didn't say "full" Ph 2 plan is required. But a very substantial plan -- yes, I believe. --michael
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2006 12:50:53 UTC