Any objections? Re: Further friendly amendment to final text
P-1788,
Are there any objections?
(See the appended, and the recirculated document
attached John's original email.)
Baker
On 06/21/2014 02:44 AM, John Pryce wrote:
P1788
.
.
.
In each flavor the decoration system *shall* make it
possible, while evaluating an arithmetic expression, to determine
that some sub-case of the FTIA holds. It *should* be supported
by a Fundamental Theorem of Decorated Interval Arithmetic (FTDIA)
stating that if evaluating an expression using decorated
intervals returns a certain decoration d on the result, then the
conditions for a corresponding FTIA sub-case are verified, hence
the corresponding FTIA conclusion follows.
This just makes explicit what was implicit before. However, it
is technically a new requirement, so I guess I need to ask if
anyone objects either to the substance of the change or the
wording that expresses it. In particular there is one "shall",
one "should". Should it be two "shall"s (two "should"s is
pointless IMO)?
I circulate the resulting text, which is revision 369 on the SVN.
.
.
.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph 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
---------------------------------------------------------------