[SCL] Again: new version of SCL draft attached

[Tanel Tammet]

Hi,

pat hayes wrote:
> If writing documents turns 
> out to be a process of discovering disagreements, then let us tackle the 
> issues that the writing process has uncovered, rather than defend the 
> documents; as until we have more agreement, the documents are only a 
> mechanism for our internal discussions.

Wholeheartedly agree. At this point the discussions without
documents are fun, but do not lead to meaningful progress.

> Right now they are not even 
> performing that role as we seem to be unable to understand one another's 
> documents. 

They are performing that role.

If you read my draft (hope you have :-) then you could surely
understand it, and I guess everybody in the SCL group could.
Nothing fancy there. Just avoided going into non-basic issues.

Chris's presentation is very different. It is decidedly NOT
simple (both conceptually and technically) and has no
examples for hard parts (only examples for easy parts
are present).

However, I still got the point that something non-obvious
is going on in Chris's MT :-), and got some inspiration
for writing down some (possibly flawed) examples in the SCL list.

So it is a bit asymmetric. Chris's presentation could surely
be improved to make it understandable. I guess one example
carried through the whole presentation (including MT
buildup!) would work.

> See above. I will try to produce something readable, if sketchy, 
> reasonably quickly. Of course, then we will have three draft documents :-)

Nothing wrong with that, quite the opposite: one of the
main problems so far has been exactly that you have NOT
produced any draft documents during the whole SCL process.
Only notes and remarks in discussions, which, as we see,
is not enough.

Regards,
         Tanel Tammet