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

Motion 42: Decoration system, re-revised text



Comments on
   20121231DecoSystemCirculatedA.pdf   with §5 Flavors, §6 Decorations overview,

I like the notion of "included flavors".

Page 12, last bullet in examples for 5.2:  The definition that gives
    a smaller set of common evaluations is *stronger*, not weaker.
    At least that's how I understand strong and weak conditions.

Page 12, Note at the end of 5.3:  "tightest" is NOT the same as the "tight"
    defined in this context, because "tightest" is a level 2 concept.  Take
    for example sqrt([1,2]).


Comments on
   20121231DecoSystemCirculatedB.pdf   with set-based decoration system details.

Page 34, 2nd line of 2nd para of 8.8.4:  is "and y_emp" supposed to be there?

Page 36, 8.8.8:  I would like to add:

         "com is (should be?) a valid 2nd argument to setDec() even
         in implementations that do not support the com decoration;
         the result shall be as if "dac" had been given."

     Perhaps clause 6.3 (in part A) should already mention this, e.g.:

        "All flavors shall support the com decoration, but implementations
        supporting a single flavor may treat "com" as equivalent to that
        flavor's strongest decoration when trying to set it, and would
        never report "com" when extracting the decoration part."

     If this is done my parenthetical "should be?" would not be needed.

Page 37, 8.8.10:  Assuming my suggestion for 6.3 above is accepted, this
     paragraph could become:

         "A single-flavor set-based implementation shall treat "com"
         as if it were "dac", in accordance with #6.3 in Chapter 1.
         A multi-flavor implementation shall define the "com"
         decoration as follows:"

Page 38, 3rd Note:  When com is provided  ->  when com is fully supported
     (Again, subject to my 6.3. suggestion.)

     A similar correction would be needed in the penultimate paragraph on
     this page.

     It may also be worth pointing out that as soon as a decoration is
     produced the evaluation ceases to be common (because the implied
     interval is then either Empty or Entire, neither of which is common).

Page 39, 2nd half:  Looks good.  (It reflects a private discussion I had
     had with John a few days ago.)

Michel.
---Sent: 2013-01-02 18:19:46 UTC