Re: RL notation
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 16:42:18 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <d9ca016b-b244-4514-9b50-e05cb8b42fad_at_e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 7, 2:29 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2:04 pm, Tegiri Nenashi <TegiriNena..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 7, 1:10 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd suggest operating
> > RL expressions in completely attribute free fascion. Whenever there is
> > an expression and there is a relation with some specific constraints
> > (e.g. having attribute x, or being empty), then it could be rewritten
> > in more general way without these constraints. In principle generality
> > should lead to simplicity....
>
> I agree this is desirable.
>
> I think that approach may place some limits on how expressive the
> resulting algebra can be. Exactly to what extent this is true
> will be a result of the axiomatization.
Well, maybe I have now talked myself out of my above idea. I can't think how it would be any less expressive.
Marshall Received on Fri Feb 08 2008 - 01:42:18 CET