Re: More on lists and sets

From: JOG <jog_at_cs.nott.ac.uk>
Date: 27 Mar 2006 08:58:39 -0800
Message-ID: <1143478719.498213.66930_at_v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>


In reference to:

Jan Hidders wrote:
> But if I'd have to point to one paper it would
> probably be Principles of Programming with Complex Objects and
> Collection Types (1995) by Buneman, Naqvi, Tannen and Wong:
> http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/90087.html

and...

Marshall Spight wrote:
> That was quite a cool paper! I was impressed by how much mileage
> they got out of the structurally-recursive view of sets, bags, and
> lists. At the same time, I still find the Tropashko algebra the
> more compelling approach.
(found at [http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs.DB/0501053])

and...

Jan Hidders wrote:
> Indeed, and let me add to this that there is already in fact some
> theory on pomsets (partially ordered multisets) as they are a natural
> generalization of sets, bags, lists and trees. The work is rather
> technical and not more than a first dip in the pool, but it might give
> you an idea of how theorists think about these things:
>
> http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/grumbach95algebra.html

Guys, many thanks indeed for these references. Fascinating stuff.

If anyone turns up any interesting publications in the same domain please post, as I am putting together a collection of relevant work, which might be of use in the future as a pooled resource (my citeUlike account is flourishing - highly recommended if you've never used it). Received on Mon Mar 27 2006 - 18:58:39 CEST

Original text of this message