Re: Converses (Re: Availability of the ANSI standard proposal?)email@example.com (Robert MacGregor)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 09:19:51 -0800
To: firstname.lastname@example.org (Pat Hayes), email@example.com
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Robert MacGregor)
Subject: Re: Converses (Re: Availability of the ANSI standard proposal?)
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
>From Pat Hayes:
>This raises another issue, however. Its all very well to say that only one
>ordering needs to be kept and not the converses, but how is it specified
>what the canonical ordering IS?
The system has to pick one. It doesn't particularly matter which one;
then the other converses can be defined in terms of it.
Again From Pat Hayes:
>Question: do isa-trees always have to have a top node?
No. For example, C++ doesn't allow for a top node (and presumably IDL
doesn't either). Loom has a top node, but its successor may not.
Some of the earlier description classifier literature talks about "forests"
rather than trees/hierarchies.
Robert M. MacGregor email@example.com
USC/ISI, 4676 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey, CA 90292 (310) 822-1511