| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Baker, P1788 On 2 Mar 2015, at 13:14, Ralph Baker Kearfott <rbk5287@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What is the status of the revisions to the document? I regret taking so long to respond, it is my teaching period in Cardiff. For now I just comment on what seems the most substantial revision to the text, namely to remedy Vincent's 17 Feb criticism of the text's currently vague specification of interval literals (also see my 20 Feb reply) by making a flavor-independent specification of "common interval literal". Dmitry acted very quickly to produce such a spec as a new subclause inserted after §9.3, so it is §9.4. Attached is his text plus my comments/edits in red: - red roman text is an insertion - [except if in brackets like this] it is a deletion - red italic text is my comment. Notes: 1. Dmitry requires uncertain form, as well as inf-sup (and point) form, be supported. Thinking it over, I'm happy with this choice. 2. I'm increasingly doubtful of "promotion" and "demotion" (between bare & decorated), see my comments in 9.4.5. I now feel one should defer to the language, on whether it is supported. This applies to the set-based version too, in 12.11. 3. If we approve this new text in Chapter 1, I hope 12.11 can be drastically shortened, to say only what the set-based standard *adds* to the Chapter 1 spec. I will start work on this, but Dmitry, maybe you already have this in hand? My assessment of changes in response to other comments will follow soon. John Pryce
Attachment:
DmitryCh1LiteralJDPnotes.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document