Re: The word "symbol"

dawn wrote:
> Marshall Spight wrote:
> >
> > I think we have stumbled upon the only way to save this thread:
> > fashion models! So much more interesting than data models.
>
> Are they more interesting before or after they are airbrushed? Are
> they more interesting when they are or are not talking? What is it for
> which they are models? What does the term "model" mean when talking
> about a "fashion model"?

It's of course better if they're not talking. Actually, since those women are so thin, I always figured it was "model" as in "scale model."

> > The person whose name is symbolized by the sequence of characters
> > 'M' 'a' 'r' 's' 'h' 'a' 'l' 'l'
> > (which is a list, not a set.)
>
> an ordered list, even (or do you consider that redundant?)

Not at all! The formal term is "sequence" as distinct from set, but I just use the term "list".

> by the way, having zipped through recent messages in this thread, I
> think going back to the glossary on what "we" mean when we use the term
> "relation" in this forum might help clarify some confusion. Then
> again, maybe not -- bring on the fashion models.

I'm still using "subset of a product of sets." Also recall that we agree (last I checked :-) on the relative insignificance of product-of-ordered-sets vs. product-of-named-sets.

Marshall Received on Wed Aug 17 2005 - 21:42:40 CDT