On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Jose Alberto Fernandez >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Why aren't all the conditions being types? >> >> Because the answer "Why aren't all the selectors being >> types?" is equally valid. Which one gets typedefed as "and"? >> > Fair enough, are <and/> and <or/> the only ones in limbo?
and <not/>. > Can we (have we) type all the rest? We could, but we haven't. > PS: What is our assesment for implementing the role bit? That we've tabled any discussion until ... well, until anybody picks up the issue again? Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
