Re: Can relvars be dissymetrically decomposed? (vadim and x insight demanded on that subject)

Tony D wrote:
> But R1 isn't a type - it *has* a type, but it isn't a type itself. The
> *type* of R1 would constitute a new domain, as that would describe
> which relation values could be considered to be of that type.
>

To go back to the much earlier example in the thread, R1 isn't a type, but DoR1 would be. Received on Mon Jul 17 2006 - 18:23:21 CDT