Editorial: Allow eliding of "is true" or "is false" when using predicate SDO names

[syg]

Editorially I believe it'd read better to remove the explicit "is true" or "is false" when invoking static semantics SDOs where the reading is natural and unambiguous. That is, we'd say "X Contains Y" instead of "X Contains Y is true".

[michaelficarra]

I was thinking generally, anywhere we say If ... is *true*, then, we could omit is *true*.

[syg]

@jmdyck brings up the good point that there isn't really a natural way to elide "is false". I can't think of a natural way to elide "is false" either, so happy to drop it from the suggestion.