<p>Published as:</p>

<p>Scott, D. A Type-Theoretical Alternative to ISWIM, CUCH, OWHY.
   Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 121 (1993), pp. 411 - 440.</p>

<p>See also:</p>

<p>Scott, D. Some Reflections on Strachey and his Work. in: A Special Issue
   Dedicated to Christopher Strachey, edited by O. Danvy and
   C. Talcott.  Higer-Order and Symbolic Computation, vol. 13 (2000),
   pp. 103-114.</p>

<p>and:</p>

<p>Gordon D. Plotkin, Set-theoretical and other elementary models of the λ-calculus,
   Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 121 (1993), pp. 351-409.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T19:10:18.443Z
It's a special kind of awesome when the author themself shows up to answer a question !
Suresh Venkat
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T20:27:17.370Z
Especially when the author is Dana Scott. :)
Kaveh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T20:38:27.473Z
first Turing award winner on cstheory, or am i missing someone?
Sasho Nikolov
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T21:16:46.560Z
And I saw Gordon Plotkin walking past the restaurant window in Iceland yesterday....
Dave Clarke
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T23:24:03.277Z
I think I need to lie down ...
Vijay D
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-11T12:41:09.533Z
Well, this is wonderful and thank you - I assume I should thank Andrej as well for receiving this answer.  A further question: are the two 1969 titles really used to denote one unchanging manuscript? John Longley, 2010, [Notions of computability at higher types I](http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/jrl/Research/notions1.pdf), describes the paper as 7 pages long, while the 1969 parts of the 1993 paper weigh in at just under 26 pages.
Charles Stewart
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T18:04:13.110Z
2011-06-10T18:04:13.110Z
Dana Scott
<p>Is the following manuscript publically available?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Dana Scott, 1969, <em>A theory of computable functions of higher type</em>. Unpublished seminar notes, 7 pages, University of Oxford.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>There is a discussion of this paper in section 8.1.2, <em>Types as sets</em>, in Cardone &amp; Hindley, 2006 <a href="http://www-maths.swan.ac.uk/staff/jrh/papers/jrhhislamweb.pdf">History of Lambda-calculus and Combinatory Logic</a>; additionally section 10.1, <em>Domain theory</em>, traces back to this manuscript some crucial order-theoretic insights.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-09T22:05:32.330Z
Did you try emailing him? dana.scott@cs.cmu.edu
Tyson Williams
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-10T16:55:57.917Z
Dana is reading this...
Andrej Bauer
<reference-request><lo.logic><type-theory><domain-theory>
Seeking Scott's original LCF paper
Charles Stewart
# Seeking Scott's original LCF paper

(Asked by: username_0 on 2011-06-09)

Is the following manuscript publically available?

> Dana Scott, 1969, *A theory of computable functions of higher type*. Unpublished seminar notes, 7 pages, University of Oxford.

There is a discussion of this paper in section 8.1.2, *Types as sets*, in Cardone & Hindley, 2006 [History of Lambda-calculus and Combinatory Logic](http://www-maths.swan.ac.uk/staff/jrh/papers/jrhhislamweb.pdf); additionally section 10.1, *Domain theory*, traces back to this manuscript some crucial order-theoretic insights.

**Tags:** reference-request, lo.logic, type-theory, domain-theory
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Did you try emailing him? dana.scott@cs.cmu.edu  
> **username_2**: Dana is reading this...  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2011-06-10. Score: 38 | Accepted answer

Published as:

Scott, D. A Type-Theoretical Alternative to ISWIM, CUCH, OWHY.
Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 121 (1993), pp. 411 - 440.

See also:

Scott, D. Some Reflections on Strachey and his Work. in: A Special Issue
Dedicated to Christopher Strachey, edited by O. Danvy and
C. Talcott. Higer-Order and Symbolic Computation, vol. 13 (2000),
pp. 103-114.

and:

Gordon D. Plotkin, Set-theoretical and other elementary models of the λ-calculus,
Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 121 (1993), pp. 351-409.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: It's a special kind of awesome when the author themself shows up to answer a question !  
> **username_5**: Especially when the author is Dana Scott. :)  
> **username_6**: first Turing award winner on cstheory, or am i missing someone?  
> **username_7**: And I saw Gordon Plotkin walking past the restaurant window in Iceland yesterday....  
> **username_8**: I think I need to lie down ...  
> **username_0**: Well, this is wonderful and thank you - I assume I should thank Andrej as well for receiving this answer.  A further question: are the two 1969 titles really used to denote one unchanging manuscript? John Longley, 2010, [Notions of computability at higher types I](http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/jrl/Research/notions1.pdf), describes the paper as 7 pages long, while the 1969 parts of the 1993 paper weigh in at just under 26 pages.  

---

