Re: further de-abstraction details

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 03/22/01

I agree with Pat's proposal (below) to change the documentation to eliminate
``abstract''.  There are no occurences of concrete within the current
files, except in a commented-out paragraph.  

> pat hayes wrote:
> [...]
> > abstract class  --> class  (or -->  DAML class , if the point needs
> > emphasising)
> > abstract object --> object
> > abstract domain  --> class domain  (or --> DAML class domain)
> > concrete class --> datatype  (or --> xmls datatype)
> > concrete object --> datatype value

The previous version of the documentation heavily used the term
``instance'' for objects.  I changed them to object (mostly abstract
object).  I'm not recommending changing back to instance.  (This comment is
mostly here as a vote to not change back.)


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST