- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:53:36 -0500
- To: sw99@w3.org
Thanks to a little help from my friends, I managed to get past this bump and thru section 2.2 of the paper... see http://www.w3.org/XML/9711theory/ELF.lsl Id: ELF.lsl,v 1.5 2000/04/19 06:41:36 connolly Exp $ or the hypertext version http://www.w3.org/XML/9711theory/ELF.html aka http://www.w3.org/XML/9711theory/ELF Dan Connolly wrote: > > So this PCA stuff > http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/projects/pca/ > > is based on this ELF thing > http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/lfcsreps/91/ECS-LFCS-91-162/ > > So I'm trying to read the ELF paper. I can't parse the formulas. > In partuclar, the B-KIND-SIG rule on page 7... second premise. > It seems to say > > K is a kind in \sigma > > but this doesn't match any of the assertion forms on the previous page: > > \sigma is a valid signature > \gamma is a valid context in \sigma > K is a kind in \gamma and \sigma > A has kind K in \gamma and \sigma > M has type A in \gamma and \sigma > > Help? Do they imply an empty \gamma in their notation or something? -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2000 02:53:52 UTC