re: re: Aaron Larson's comments

[David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

    Date: Tue, 31 Oct 89 10:22:59 -0800
    From: chapman@tle.enet.dec.com (31-Oct-1989 1315)

    >However, the glossary is not consistent with this.  There is no entry for
    >"member", and the entry for "instance" is inconsistent with the terminology
    >I thought we were using, is ungrammatical, and uses the word "element" in
    >yet another new way (derived from "element of a set", but inconsistent with
    >other uses of "element" in the specification; anyway "member of a set" is
    >as good as "element of a set" so let's use it).  Actually, in spite of the
    >number of reviews it has been through the glossary is still pretty terrible.
    Can you propose (or have you already) a definition for "member"?

The one earlier in the message from which you extracted the >-prefixed text.