[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@xxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning*From*: Benjamin Fallenstein <b.fallenstein@xxxxxx>*Date*: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 11:53:03 +0100*Cc*: zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx*References*: <3A34009B.FB990E0@xxxxxx> <20001211015201.E18012@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3A342176.B03A9B9F@xxxxxx> <20001211035226.B3587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3A3E67F4.3C00B087@xxxxxx> <20001219124905.A7717@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3A41351B.BA16A23D@xxxxxx> <20001221111527.B29066@xxxxxxxxxxx> <3A425394.C54EF3AC@xxxxxx> <3A478411.4B27CC31@xxxxxx> <20001227113520.A4366@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho schrieb: > Actually, I now think we need to revisit those definitions. > I can see at least two good definitions for a subspace: > > 1) Let Z be a ZigZag space. Z' is a subspace of Z iff > * it is a ZigZag space > * its set of cells is a subset of Z's set of cells > * its set of connections is a subset of Z's set of connections > > 2) Let Z be a ZigZag space. Z' is a subspace of Z iff > * it is a subspace of Z (by definition 1) and > * if d is a dimension in Z' and there is a connection along d > in Z', then for all cells c and c' in Z', if there is a > connection from c to c' along d in Z, then there is a connection > from c to c' along d. > > 1 is your def. 2 is an extension of my earlier def > (instead of a set of dims defining the subspace, we have two disjoint > set of dims, one for defining the closure, and another for including > more connections; I've been calling these hard and soft dimensions in > my sketches). For general use in versioning etc., I would not use the closuring: for example, you'd want to be able to take the whole tree starting at the "AllViews" cell as a subspace, but it isn't a closed set in any way that makes sense. (Of course it's a closed set with respect to the dimensions "d.i-don't-exist" and "d.me-neither", but that doesn't help us. ;)) > Def 1 is nice also theoretically since it mirrors many other subspace > definitions in mathematics. Def 2 seems more natural: you cannot arbitrarily > remove connections from a rank where the cells are in the space. I agree that def 2 is more natural, but there will be cases where we need 1, so I wouldn't totally lock that out. What about calling subspaces according to 2 "standard subspace?" I've been thinking a bit about how to phrase the definitions, and I think I'd prefer a phrasing that stresses we either select a number of cells and a number of connections, or a number of cells and a number of dimensions, i.e.: Z' is a subspace of Z with respect to a set of cells C and a set of connections N iff... Z' is a standard subspace of Z with respect to a set of cells C and a set of dimensions D iff... - Benja

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning***From:*Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

**References**:**Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Tuomas Lukka

**Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Tuomas Lukka

**Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Tuomas Lukka

**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Nile***From:*Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

**Subspaces & ZZ versioning***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning***From:*Benjamin Fallenstein

**Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning***From:*Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] gZZ: Parallel text editing showing transclusions WORKS!** - Next by Date:
**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning** - Next by thread:
**Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Subspaces & ZZ versioning** - Index(es):