Re: [Admin] Agenda for RIF telecon 6 January

Michael Kifer wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:44:17 +0100
> Christian de Sainte Marie <> 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.

... yes, I also think if we just get going with proposal 2 we avoid that 
and other "maintainance" problems  with the specific guards.

p.s.: Note that we need to also check the affected test cases that use 
guards, i.e. replace or remove them.


Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
email:  url:

Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2009 14:00:31 UTC