Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: comments on flavors; Prof. Kulisch's motion

If we accept Juergen's point 3 as a consequence of the motion on flavors, I then
see the intent of Prof. Kulisch's motion as being clear.  Since Nate has seconded it
in a private email to me, I will forward his email to the list and make the
discussion period official.

Baker


On 10/02/2012 04:32 AM, Jürgen Wolff von Gudenberg wrote:

John, p1788
     after reading the flavor proposal carefully I still am not shure what will be its consequences. some comments, suggestions, questions. Let me start with  4 provocative postulates

     1. the classical or common intervals are a flavor !
         will it be sufficient to only provide these ?
     2. the set-based flavor is required !
         this is the result of our work.
     3. the Kaucher flavor is optional
     4. the cset flavor is not necessary

my answers
   1: yes but not sufficient
2. yes
3. if the kaucher subgroup will be ready in time, I  would like to include it
4. i see no applications

Sorry but I still think we should keep our number of flavors as small as possible.



Now some comments to the draft text
2.1 2nd paragraph line 2 "is a set of reals" add "connected"
2.1 3rd para delete the last sentence
2.1 6th para change "more accesible" by "always accessible"
2.1 last 2 paras delete quotations of cset model

5.1 If we decide to make classical a flavor, a table of operations belongs to this section
5.5 the decoration "com"
in the set-based  flavor  we have the decoration"dac" what means defined and continuous. together with information on overflow we have "com"

Juergen