70 likes | 162 Views
Comments on 32N1238 ISO/IEC WD24707. Japan ISO/IEC JTC1 SC32/WG2 2005.4.15. Folded map is necessary. We think one of the significant features of CL is type-free.
E N D
Comments on 32N1238 ISO/IEC WD24707 Japan ISO/IEC JTC1 SC32/WG2 2005.4.15
Folded map is necessary • We think one of the significant features of CL is type-free. • For example, some name (or non-logical symbol) can be interpreted to Domain of Discourse and the relational extension of the Domain of Discourse at the same time. • Then, to ensure the consistency among them, folded map is necessary. • This is what we learned from the previous version of CL WD. • But, we cannot find any description about folded map in this version of CL WD. 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫
Folded map Note: RelI: relational extention of UI XÎVOVR relI intI intI(X) ÎUI relI(X) ÎRelI relationI : folded map such that relationI (intI(X) ) : relI(X) 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫
Semantic Conformance should be defined dependent on Domain of Discourse • In new version, the term ‘domain of discourse’ is used as a (subset of ) of range of interpretation, a subset of ‘universe’. • This is a good idea. • As far as we can understand, this can be related to context, subject area etc. in XMDR etc. • To have more semantics, it is better to describe ‘7.1.2 Semantics’ conformance, dependent on D, a domain discourse. 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫
7.1.2 Semantics’ conformance’ • Annex A, B, C does not say nothing about the dialect’s formal semantics. • But, for example, how do we know, (and (Person Harry) and (Organization ISO)) is a ‘boolean sentence of type conjunction and component C1 … Cn’ • Intuitively, it is obvious. Some more rigorousness may be required. • Syntactical definition of formal semantics of each dialect may be necessary. • So, we can say nothing about whether J(T)=I(T) because we do not know T correspond to what type of sentence at table1. • And then, ‘weakly semantically conformant ‘ is not necessary because any text T of the dialect is weakly semantically conformant as far as it is satisfiable in its formal semantics because a formal semantics of the dialect is a extension of CL. 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫
Editorial (or structural) comment (1 of 2) • ‘5.2 Design Overview’ should be moved to‘Annex(informative)’ or ‘Introduction’ • because this part is almost tutorial and not normative at all. 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫
Editorial (or structural) comment (2of 2) • The following annex should go to the main text • ‘Annex A(informative)’ (KIF) • ‘Annex B(informative)’ (CGIF) • ‘Annex C(informative)’ (XCL) because if we look at ‘7.Conformance’, these are the core of this standard. • ‘6.5 Summary of the core syntax’ • should go to Annex(informative) since this is not normative • or may disappear because ‘Annex A(informative)’ (KIF) come to the main text. 東京電力株式会社 システム企画部 岡部雅夫