- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:58:41 -0500
- To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:44:17 +0100 Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr> wrote: > *PROPOSED:* Change all negative guards to return true only for literals that are not of the type, false for non-literals (closing ISSUE-79 [6]). > *PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (based on resolution of issue-79) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Proposal 2 seems to obviate proposal 1. Proposal 1 has a problem of naming. If we use names like isNotInteger then semantics in Prop 1 clashes with the mnemonic meaning of such a negative guard. (A more accurate mnemonic would be isLiteralThatIsNotInteger). Proposal 2 does not seem to suffer from that problem. michael
Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2009 02:59:18 UTC