RE: Proposed Venn Diagrams

Well, if D has an "open" (I like that better than "custom", cannot one
choose to use an interface that just happens to be the same as used in
C?  Perhaps this is semantic or perhaps the issue is real -- I can't
really tell.

-----Original Message-----
From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:13 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Proposed Venn Diagrams





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:17 AM
> To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Proposed Venn Diagrams
> 

> One nit -- or rather question.  Why do you have no overlap whatsoever
> between D and C?  I thought that if you are careful enough you can
> define thingies in D that make people in C happy.  Isn't that partly
> what the alligator wrestling is about?

I think D and C are disjoint by definition: C uses a "uniform" set of
operations  and D uses custom-defined operations.  (BTW, I think I agree
with Walden's point that "custom" a better antonym for "uniform" than
"open"
is).

The alligator wrestling was about whether F overlapped C as well as D.

BTW, what is the set theory term for two sets that have a non-null
intersection but neither is a subset of the other? "Overlap" sounds good
because they visually overlap in a Venn diagram, but that may not be
"correct".

Received on Friday, 9 May 2003 11:34:02 UTC