Re: Distributivity in Tropashko's Lattice Algebra

Marshall Spight wrote:
> A month or so ago we were discussing relational algebras, and
> we were looking at a lattice algebra defined in a paper by
> Vadim Tropashko. It had two operators, natural join and inner
> union.
>
> One point that was made at the time was that these two operators
> are not distributive. (Although they are commutative, associative,
> idempotent, and absorbtive.)

If you're taking about http://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0501/0501053.pdf,  then I am not sure whether the new algebra (NA) itself is very interesting as applied to the RM. Clearly, the NA implies some RM extension due to the fact that the NA is defined (sort of) over an infinitely countable set of relations and some relations are infinitely countable themselves.

The reason for this kind of infinity is the selection and rename definitions both of which rely on joining with infinite relations, the number of potentially required relations being infinite itself. Received on Mon Aug 15 2005 - 13:18:24 CDT