Re: Generalised approach to storing address details

paul c a écrit :

> Neo wrote:
> ...
> >>You think that RM can't handle hierachies after I answered your demand on the *Brothers and Sisters* thread with a simple structure that perfectly met your criterias?
> >
> >
> > It is not that RM can't handle hierarchies, ...
>
> I would like to know how the RM handles hierarchies, without the aid of
> a builtin such as TTM's TCLOSE that is essentially outside the scope of
> the RM (eg., it seems to me that it does a transformation that can't be
> couched in fundamental RM terms.)
On an abstract and logical level, hierarchies are easily handled by the dissociation between the concept of element and the concept of lineage(child/parent, previous/next etc...). This usually comes to two relations, one describing the element and anothe describing its lineage . On a computing and implementational level, hierarchies are easily handled to recursivity and creation of appropriate operators. That is really all there is to it. Hierachies are lightyears from being off borders as opposed to more complex issues in RM such as subtyping.

RM was created on the first place in the perspective of getting away from the sterile hierarchic paradigm of computing...A way for breaking the vicious circle in which lots of idiots try to get us back...

Regards...

> p
Received on Tue Dec 12 2006 - 17:28:51 CET