"any" FAQ needed?

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

> So my opinion could well
>be a mere rephrasing of ideas already stated by somebody else or, more
>probably, simply miss the point.

It is a lot to read through.  What if we created a FAQ that described our
collective thinking on the question, and our discussion could then focus on
changing details of the document, until we reach consensus on it.  Someone
could post it every few weeks with up-to-date changes.  That would make it a
little easier to focus, and allow other people to participate.  John
Clifford's definitions would be a good start, along with some less-technical
amplification.


What we put together here might be a good resource when the logic paper is
written for the reference grammar.  I realize that sounds like a lot of work
for a topic we would all probably like to see resolved once and for all, but
the question will come up again and again if new people don't have a single
cohesive place they can read our reasoning and conclusions.  Imagine the
chore of going back and reading through all the old postings on any,
opaqueness, etc!
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Chris Bogart
 cbogart@quetzal.com
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~