[art-w]

Have you looked at the table of contents?

http://people.ucalgary.ca/~rzach/static/open-logic/open-logi...

Summary: They are going for the foundations of maths, computer science, and logic with completeness, decidability and computability on the menu. I don't know the authors, and I understand your reticence, but the contents looks really good. It's not the kind of logic a practitioner would care about, probably, but it is the big mathy results that logicians do need to learn: they actually mention that this isn't a new course for them, but rather a reference book for lessons that are already given to philosophers.

It's also clearly not written for people who are afraid of maths -- I'm more concerned about their targeted audience. Can you go through that text without an already solid interest in maths?

[JadeNB]

I was worried not about the list of topics, but rather about whether or not their coverage is mathematically accurate, which I would like to see a mathematician 'on staff' to ensure. To be sure, the best way to test the validity of that concern would have been to read the content, not to play credential checking.