AndrevanTonder <andre_at_het.brown.edu> writes:
> In the explicit and implicit naming syntactic layers, it is not stated
> what the default values for sealedness and opaqueness will be if the
> corresponding clauses are absent.
I see this is worded confusingly (as a result of a syntax change a
long time ago)---the issue was actually decided, with the defaults
being "not sealed" and "not opaque". I'll try to clarify the wording.
Thanks for spotting!
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
Received on Mon Feb 05 2007 - 08:24:51 UTC