[SCL] analytic operators and axioms

[Tanel Tammet]

Hi,

Chris Menzel wrote:

>On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 05:58:35PM -0500, John Sowa wrote:
>  
>
>>Robert and Chris,
>>
>>I like the following description of the abstract syntax:
>>
>>   http://www.ontologos.org/SCL%20Abstract%20Syntax.pdf
>>    
>>
>>It is more readable than the current SCL document, 
>>    
>>
>
>Well, I do find it virtuously elegant, but more readable?  "There is a
>collection of analytic/selector operators on SCL formulas with the nine
>subgroup clusters in one-one correspondence with the nine
>synthetic/constructor operators (their inverse)..."  Now *I* like that
>way of talking, but it sure sounds like the same sort of discourse you
>randomly excoriate in the current document.
>  
>

I agree. Despite the elegance, it is harder to read than is necessary.

Here is a concrete suggestion regarding the analytic description of  
abstract syntax:

a)  Let us avoid analytic description in the main body of the SCL draft.
     If we just use synthetic descriptions (the "ordinary" stuff), the spec
     is easier to read and shorter.

b)  Let us put the analytic description into the special appendix
     chapter of the spec. The analytic description does have its
     nice points, hence why not include it in a way that does not
     hurt readability of the main body nor influence the
     presentation of the main body in any way.

     The only thing is that the current analytic description probably
     needs some minor modifications once the main parts of
     SCL spec (using synthetic style) are ready, so as to
     conform exactly to the synthetic presentation.

In this way we should be able to eat our proverbial cake and have it too.

Tanel Tammet


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://philebus.tamu.edu/pipermail/scl/attachments/20031107/129f2d07/attachment.htm