From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-28 14:20:17
Rob Stewart wrote:
> From: Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]>
>
>>Further tags don't really "handle" things -- they are just data. "Describe" (or
>>alike) would be better in this context.
>
>
> s/handled by/handled by using/
>
> [While we're on English usage, and just in case you have or might
> use it in the documentation, note that your use of "alike" above
> is not idiomatically correct (in the US anyway), and I'm not
> positive it is semantically correct. "Similar" works fine as
> does "the like."]
>
Oh thanks -- a good thing to know (never thought it's formal, but it seems it's
not even informal ;-) ).
>
>> When classifying types, it is often necessary to match against
>> several possibilities of one aspect.
>> The most important case is to match all of them. In other words,
>> to ignore that aspect. The tags named "unspecified_" plus the aspect
>> name describe these cases.
>>
>>Still clear enough?
>
>
> Pretty close:
>
> When classifying types it is often necessary to match against
> several variations of one aspect. The most important case is
> to match any variation; that is, to ignore that aspect. The
> tags named "unspecified_" plus the aspect's name describe
> these cases.
>
Nice! "Variation" seems way better than "possibility"...
>>No. It's about what happens when an abstract tag (or whatever we call it) is used
>>to describe a type to be created:
>>
>> An abstract tag has a non-abstract semantical equivalence when used in the
>> context of type synthesis
>
>
> s/semantical/semantic/
>
> With that, it seems pretty good.
>
Interesting! My dictionary tells me both "semantical" and "semantic" exist and
both are adjectives with the same translation...
Is it lying? Or does it depend on the context which one to use?
>
>>I've currently no idea how to say this without the "abstract" term, though.
>
>
> I don't understand the subject well enough to offer any more help
> here, I'm afraid.
>
Never mind! Seems straighter, already...
Thanks,
Tobias