Distinguish literal from unknown concept #466
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
davidcarlisle
requested changes
May 3, 2023
| </li> | ||
| </ul> | ||
| </dd> | ||
| <dt><dfn data-dfn-for="intent" id="intent_number">number</dfn></dt> | ||
| <dd> | ||
| A literal <a data-link-for="intent" data-link-type="dfn" href="#intent_number">number</a> such as <code>2.5</code> denotes itself. | ||
| An explicit <a data-link-for="intent" data-link-type="dfn" href="#intent_number">number</a> such as <code>2.5</code> denotes itself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah good catch, unrelated use of "literal" we should make this change in any case, it is independent of any concept/literal rewording
davidcarlisle
approved these changes
May 3, 2023
|
I am merging this so we have a hopefully better document to discuss at the meeting. |
github-actions bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2023
SHA: 0274979 Reason: push, by NSoiffer Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is a modest alternative to #459 that primarily distinguishes concepts not currently know by the AT and literals; the latter now being only explicit literals prefixed by
_.Even though an unknown concept is treated the same as an explicit literal, there is an important distinction: an unknown concept is only unknown for a particular AT and a particular version of the concept dictionaries; future updates may add it to a dictionary and then it is known, possibly with special behaviors.
So, while I would generally discourage use of literals, where someone insists on specific speech that doesn't correspond to a sensible concept, I would recommend they use a literal. This seems better than using a concept hoping that it probably never will be added to a dictionary. Of course, if they think it's a concept then a concept it is.
In this PR, I'm making the distinction in the text below the grammar rather than in the grammar itself. This is solely to avoid getting mired in character class details. If we decide to drop
NCNAMEand be more explicit in the grammar (something along the lines of a concept starting with a letter; a literal starts with an "_"), we probably should have separateConceptandLiteralproductions.