[Fwd: motion 7 NaI]

[Jürgen Wolff v Gudenberg <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

revised rationale is attached.
Voting starts this week !

--
=======
      o          Prof. Dr. J. Wolff v. Gudenberg,  Informatik 2
     / \         Univ. Wuerzburg,  Am Hubland,   D-97074 Wuerzburg
 info2 o        Tel.: +49 931 / 31-86602  Fax: +49 931 / 888-6603
   / \  Uni             e-mail: wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  o   o Wuerzburg         http://www2.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/

--- Begin Message ---

• To: Marco Nehmeier <marco@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefan Siegel <St.Siegel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jürgen Wolff v. Gudenberg" <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: motion 7 NaI
• From: "J. Wolff v. Gudenberg" <wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:19:09 +0200
• User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)

Intervallers

Thank you for the discussion on motion 7. i have rewritten parts of the rationale. But still I propose to introduce ONE interval datum NaI for each interval format, as the result of an illegal construction. (level 2)

The representation shall be a pair of signaling NaNs. (level 3)

I know that the issue is contraversal. To come to a sound decision I would like to ask you to vote for one of the following three alternatives.

1. YES ,there should be a unique NaI
2. NO , there should be no NaI at all
3. NO , there should be a NaI with payload

thank you
Juergen
--
=======
      o          Prof. Dr. J. Wolff v. Gudenberg,  Informatik 2
     / \         Univ. Wuerzburg,  Am Hubland,   D-97074 Wuerzburg
 info2 o        Tel.: +49 931 / 31-86602  Fax: +49 931 / 888-6603
   / \  Uni             e-mail: wolff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  o   o Wuerzburg         http://www2.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/

Attachment: NaI.pdf
Description: application/download

--- End Message ---