Re: By The Dawn's Normal Light

From: Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_mail.ocis.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:33:05 -0700
Message-ID: <et70o013kluk5j5tc4g6h8pkcl62ac4pq8_at_4ax.com>


"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.comREMOVE> wrote:

>"erk" <eric.kaun_at_pnc.com> wrote in message
>news:1098899907.484940.109850_at_f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> I can buy that atomicity is relative... that seems reasonable. So from
>> the point of view of relational theory, sets and lists have no
>> structure (their operators can do whatever they like, as with any other
>> type), but relations do.
>
>It makese sense to me that types like video and pictures would be black
>boxes to the "collections engine" but a list of text has a structure that
>the collections engine could accomodate. --dawn

     Video and pictures have structure. Why could the collections engine not know it when it can know about text structure?

     It is merely a change in representation to put a video into text form. (Whether it would be best manipulated that way is doubtful, but it is possible.)

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.
Received on Thu Oct 28 2004 - 00:33:05 CEST

Original text of this message