[tmql-wg] Result set requirements

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Robert Barta
| 
| But someone could argue that you are introducing through the back
| door a TM update language: You have a TM information item and you
| would like to modify some aspects of it.
| 
| I think we need that at some stage, but this is certainly nothing I
| would do ad-hoc.

Not only that, but I'm not sure I'd do it at all. I discussed this
with Geir Ove today and we both found ourselves thinking that simply
removing the old items and adding new ones might be cleaner and
simpler. 

For one thing, if a base name is reified and a query suddenly changes
its [value], then what? Can we know that the reification is still OK?
>From a semantic point of view delete/add seems much safer.
 
| I would VERY MUCH prefer this in TMQL at this stage. Mostly because
| it makes clear that the language remains explicitely "functional"
| (copying and cloning and modifying has this "side effect" touch).

Yes. And "side effects" are not nice.
 
| I think we should drive something like this forward.

What is "something like this" here?

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >