- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:35:53 -0400
- To: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Thank you Stella. We'll put your suggested changes into the doc. (Most of them are there already.) Just a few clarifications. > 2.4 Terms > --------------- > Definition (Term) > item 7 > if t is a term --> > if t is any term other than a variable or External term. The definition allows t to be a variable or an external term. A subsequent definition makes such a term not well-formed. I think the above correction introduces an unfounded recursion into the definition, so I left it out (disallowing vars is ok, but mentioning External there is unfounded). > 2.6 Signatures > --------------------- > "A set of signatures is coherent iff" > does this need to be qualified - by saying "FLD > set of signatures" or by indicating that if a dialect doesn't > (eg) include frames, its coherent set doesn't need the "->" > signature. I do not think so. Dialects can include all the types of signatures, but not use them (not assign them to any symbol). I agree that a better formulation could be found, but the above is not good enough. It defines coherence only for FLD signatures and not for the dialects. thanks --michael
Received on Monday, 14 April 2008 03:36:39 UTC