- From: Boley, Harold <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:03:17 -0400
- To: "Christian de Sainte Marie" <csma@ilog.fr>
- Cc: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E4D07AB09F5F044299333C8D0FEB45E904FFE154@nrccenexb1.nrc.ca>
It was three to three, and if we continue to "leave as is" (there apparently is no RESOLVED), we cannot define user functions with oriented equations -- evidence that I found after F2F10 and emailed to the Tuesday telecon (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jun/0046.html): ----------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/F2F10_Minutes#Naming Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : Equal roles should be left and right Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : <Equal> should have <left> and <right> not side and side. [Scribe assist by Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> ] Christian de Sainte Marie <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Christian_de_Sainte_M arie&action=edit> : is symmetric Harold Boley <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/index.php?title=Harold_Boley&action=e dit> : prefer not to go back to left and right Dave Reynolds <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Dave_Reynolds> : +1 on left/right being (slightly) better Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : do not want to get your rules back from RIF with equalities flipped Chris Welty <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Chris_Welty> : discussion was that equality is symmetric, and we didn't want to force people to choose left and right PROPOSED: shall we switch from Equal/side/side to Equal/left/right ? Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : leave it as is: three Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : changing it: Jos, Sandro, (dave reynolds) Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> : I'm willing to drop it on the graounds that it's a lot of work to change. [Scribe assist by Sandro Hawke <http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Sandro_Hawke> ] leave as is ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Working on other BLD updates, I found that it would not be much work to change. I would be willing to do this small, reasonable change (also in the XSD) before more test cases (so far only factorial.rif) etc. would make it hard to implement. Hence my proposal. Best, Harold -----Original Message----- From: Christian de Sainte Marie [mailto:csma@ilog.fr <mailto:csma@ilog.fr> ] Sent: June 12, 2008 5:00 AM To: Boley, Harold Cc: Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail) Subject: Re: DTB and BLD Use Cases: User-Defined Functions -- factorial example, Equal in the head, oriented equations, left and right roles Boley, Harold wrote: > > Here's the current XML syntax (with proposed differentiation > of <side> into <left> and <right> indicated as XML comments): Re <side> VS <left>+<right>: I thought that had been discussed and settled during F2F10 (to leave as it is, that is: <side>)? Cheers, Christian
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2008 13:04:02 UTC