Re: Kaucher intervals
> Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:40:24 -0600
> From: Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Alexandre Goldsztejn <alexandre.goldsztejn@xxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Dan Zuras Intervals <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> John Pryce <j.d.pryce@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Kaucher intervals
>
> P-1788,
>
> On 12/31/2011 3:14 AM, Alexandre Goldsztejn wrote:
> > Dear Dan and colleagues,
> >
> .
> .
> .
>
> > . . .
> .
> .
> .
>
> >> OK, let's decide NOW whether or not we want Kauchers
> >> to be part of the standard, extension or not.
> >
> > I agree with you Dan, let's not loose more time on this question ! I
> > think this would be a critical error to include Kaucher intervals in
> > the standard, that could even lead to its failure. But this is only my
> > personal opinion.
> >
>
> Do you wish to bring forward a motion? The only related motion
> I see in our archives is Motion 12, "Inner Addition and Subtraction,"
> which I note passed unanimously (of all people voting) on
> October 10, 2010. Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding
> is that Kaucher intervals might be one way of implementing inner
> operations.
>
> . . .
>
> Best regards,
>
> Baker
>
Give me a moment. I'm consulting
with Bob on the patent thing. - Dan