[SCL] scl 1.1

[John F. Sowa]

Bill and Chris,

I agree that we have to get this document finished quickly
and that its first audience is us.  And I wouldn't want to
suggest anything that delays us from making the deadline
of Dec. 17th (or 12th).

Having said that, I still believe that a lot can be done
to clarify and simplify the document because I do believe
that there are a lot of people who are waiting for it:

  1. Many people who have been using logic-based languages
     such as DLs, CGs, Prolog, etc., who did take a course
     in logic at one time, who had forgotten most of what
     they learned about model theory, and who could follow
     a clearly written presentation.

  2. Reviewers in all of the organizations that may be
     interested in using (S)CL or languages based on it:
     W3C, ISO, ANSI, SUO, UML, Topic Maps, etc.  Each of
     those organizations has a few people who know enough
     math & logic that they could read a clearly written
     document, and we should try to make it accessible
     to them.

  3. Students and professors of comp. sci. around the world
     who would welcome a unified treatment of a wide range
     of logic-based notations, which they could use in their
     courses -- provided that they could understand it.

  4. Reviewers of papers for publication and grants from
     gov't agences, who might look more kindly on submissions
     that refer to (S)CL if they were able to understand it.

  5. The readers of my tutorial on math & logic, which should
     provide enough background for people to read a clearly
     written treatment of (S)CL semantics:

        http://www.jfsowa.com/logic/math.htm

     The counter for that page indicates 14,389 hits, which
     indicates a significant number of people who are at least
     willing to look at something like that.

John