Re: [Stds-754] nomenclature for representable entities

[Mike Cowlishaw <MFC@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jim wrote (and others commented on):

> > Based on a quick look at all uses of "number" in the draft, it appears
> > that most are intended to exclude NaNs, which is consistent with
> > Warren's suggestion.  For example, 7.3.1 says "if one operand is a
> > number and the other a NaN", 7.5.1 refers to "treating numbers and 
NaNs
> > alike", 7.10 has "totalOrder(number, +NaN)" implying that the first
> > operand is not a NaN.  I think following Warren's suggestion will
> > require fewer and less awkward changes.

I think that's correct (fewer changes).  Let's not get hung up on the 
spelling -- it sounds as though what we need is a term for "floating-point 
numbers and NaNs" (which might refer to formats, encodings, or just the 
set of values).  I'm not sure that 'representable entities' is best 
because we have diligently avoided using that term in a general sense, and 
in particular we use it when we are specifically not talking about 
encodings.

I suggest we choose a term, make the document consistent using it, then 
worry about the spelling afterwards.

(Possible terms include:  Michel's 'FP entity', also perhaps 'FP item', 
'FP object', 'FP article', 'FP packet', 'FP blob' ...) 

mfc