[sc34wg3] Comments on latest TMRM draft
Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:20:19 +0200
On Jul 14, 2005, at 8:52 PM, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> To say that "values are unconstrained" seems like hand-waving. At the
> very least some minimal conditions have to be spelled out.
FWIW, I think the TMRM could only benefit from explicitly saying that
values are typed. (They are anyhow, because if they do not have a
type, no one can do anything with them. So why not say it? You cannot
even compare two values if they have no type.)
The value types (aka data types) are of course unconstrained. They
can be simple or complex. For the TMRM value types (and values) are
opaque of course. (Is that what is meant with 'unconstrained')?
Aside: does the TMRM assume that values can be compared?
Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer
Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT'