XML Schema and international Booleans

[Reynolds, Gregg]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nik O [mailto:niko at cmsplatform.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 12:42 PM
> 
> Gregg Reynolds wrote:
> >
> >If we wanted to be really up-to-the-minute, we could follow
> >the usage of logicians and use U+22A4 (DOWN TACK)
> >and U+22A5 (DOWN TACK) as the canonical values [...]
> 
> Why not use U+22A8 (TRUE) and U+22AD (NOT TRUE)?  I don't know how
> logicians/mathematicians use these, but presumably they are 
> used enough that
> the Unicode org described them.
> 

If they're accurately labeled, I'd say use 'em, but I somehow got the idea
those are used in writing proofs to express logical entailment (or whatever
the term is) or something like that, rather than truth.  I.e., I suspect
Unicode got the labels slightly wrong.  But I must also stress that I'm not
a logician, I only play one on the internet.  I'm quite fond of
non-sequiters, especially since my tennis shoes are in the wash.  I guess my
main objection to U+22A8 and U+22AD is they seem to define false in terms of
true, which seems to denigrate falseness, and is clearly insensitive to
liars.

> There would be no confusion with the Roman letter "T", and
> "pi(e)-on-the-side" is one of the seven true paths to 
> happiness, que no?
> 

Doesn't somebody have an international symbol for beer we could use for
'true'?

-gregg

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)