Re: How to scope the note about D and override(E,D)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen writes:

>>> I don't see any appeal to component identity in the current
>>> design.  At most there is an appeal to element equivalence.
>> 
>> I'm trying to avoid requiring the use of deep-equal as well, yes.
>
> Thank you for clarifying.
>
> Trying to avoid deep equality by appealing to an undefined
> concept of source element identity, on the other hand, seems to
> me to be a bad trade.

It's not undefined.  I gave a precise definition, both in that email
and in algorithm O (the same definition).  For those with long
memories, I could and perhaps should have just said "same
URI+tumbler".  The definition I gave is equivalent, just more
human-friendly.

ht
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFNfm6OkjnJixAXWBoRAmbdAKCDsAOu+i24DLtVXuat67pK1z/hNwCeKtUZ
gGf6PJ0Slz3WiFpJDyFEl9s=
=Rd28
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Monday, 14 March 2011 19:38:19 UTC