I am seconding it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* stds-1788@xxxxxxxx on behalf of R. Baker Kearfott
*Sent:* ¨. 29/12/2551 5:48
*To:* stds-1788
*Subject:* P1788: Our first formal motion enclosed
IEEE P1788 members:
John Pryce, the technical editor for the final document we
will submit to our Sponsor, has put forth our first formal
motion, which I append, along with the rationale. To advance
this motion, I first need a second from someone. After that,
we will have the three-week discussion period, then the
3-week voting period, according to 11.2 of our policies and
procedures document.
Please:
1. Read the appended motion.
2. Proffer a "second" directly to the list, if you agree with
the motion.
Sincerely,
Ralph Baker Kearfott
(acting chair, P1788)
===============================================================
=====
Motion P1788/M0001.01_StandardizedNotation
Proposer: J D Pryce
=====
The P1788 standard will initially use the notation proposed in
the paper "Standardized notation in interval analysis" by R.B.
Kearfott, M.T. Nakao, A. Neumaier, S.M. Rump, S.P. Shary, and P.
van Hentenryck, available at
http://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~neum/papers.html
This notation will be open to amendment after sufficient
experience of using it.
The standard will include a copy of the above paper (as possibly
amended) in an appendix.
=====
==Rationale==
As that paper itself says, interval notation is somewhat
fragmented at present. Here is the view of some experts who have
thought hard about this issue. We can do great service to
interval computation for many years ahead by helping to
disseminate their recommended practice, and following it
ourselves.
Rather than spend preliminary time debating whether we want to
amend the proposed standard notation, I think it is more
fruitful for us all to accept it as it is for now, and accept
the discipline of following its notation for future position
papers. In due course, either we are satisfied we can accept it
permanently, or some of us are so annoyed by its perceived
deficiencies that we have some constructive changes to make.
The motion does not say that all position papers SHALL use this
notation. I just strongly recommend this, so we get experience
of using it.
=====
===============================================================
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------