On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>wrote: > == Conclusion == > > I believe this substantiates my previous claim that viewOf is somehow more > fundamental. Based on just a simple set-theoretic definition of viewOf, I > have been able to construct a formal definition of complementOf. But I > don't believe it would be as easy to construct a primitive definition of > complementOf and use just that to define viewOf. > +1 This has been my intuition for a while, I'm glad you were able to formalize it like this. Jim -- Jim McCusker Programmer Analyst Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics Yale School of Medicine james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330 http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu PhD Student Tetherless World Constellation Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute mccusj@cs.rpi.edu http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 19:19:29 UTC