On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 02:53 -0500, Pavitra wrote:
> That is, "I object to all dependent actions" is at the recordkeepors'
> discretion, because one can only be certain that one has fully
> "unpacked" the statement by reading every public message in a certain
> time frame exhaustively.
>
> By contrast, "I object to all dependent actions whose intents were
> published in the above-quoted message" is binding on recordkeepors,
> because the set of possible actions can be exhausted with examination of
> just one other message, which is referenced explicitly. The task of
> expanding the statement "I object to all quoted intents" into its
> component actions ("I object to X", "I object to Y", etc.) is guaranteed
> to terminate.
I was actually planning to test this some time in the near future; but
we'll have to wait for dependent actions to be fixed first.
--
ais523
