- From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:59:55 -0700
- To: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
- CC: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>, Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@biotec.tu-dresden.de>, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Java's terms aren't bad:
i instanceof c
c extends cc
name contains val
I think = makes sense for named args: foo(a=1, b=2)
Yes, the comma was intentional. Almost everyone wants a comma here.
Not everybody will support logical functions. Yet everyone will support
the builtins. These External() wrappers are really annoying. They
should not be required for the "official" built-ins.
Michael Kifer wrote:
>
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:44:37 -0400
> Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Syntax for named arguments to use '('Name TERM)')' instead of (Name '->' TERM)
>> Syntax for frames to use TERM '::' TERM instead of TERM '->' TERM
>> Syntax for member to use TERM 'TY' TERM instead of TERM '#' TERM
>> Syntax for subclass to us TERM 'SC' TERM instaed of TERM '##' TERM
>>
>
>
> You are proposing to replace perfectly good syntax with ugly alternatives.
>
> CSMA's proposal for using Name = Term is bad because it misleadingly suggests
> that there is only one value for Name, but in fact the value of Name is a set
> and Term is just one of the values in a set.
>
> If you want to overhaul the syntax and free up -> for (classical) implication,
> then let's use something that mnemonically makes sense:
>
> a isa b
> c subclassOf cc or c sub cc
> name hasValue val or name hasVal val
> etc.
>
> We should use a different sign for rule implication both in BLD and in PRD.
> That should be => <= and not -> <- (provided that we agree on the overall
> overhaul).
>
>
> --michael
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 18:02:05 UTC