Re: Hierarchal vs Non-Hierarchal Interfaces to Biological Taxonomy
From: J M Davitt <jdavitt_at_aeneas.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:18:58 GMT
Message-ID: <mvLhh.5984$ja6.3248_at_tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
>
>
> I think hierarchy was originally was related to the power structure
> among preists. May be the emphasis on one parent came from there.
>
>
>
>
> Do you consider graphs and networks to be the same or different?
>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:18:58 GMT
Message-ID: <mvLhh.5984$ja6.3248_at_tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
Neo wrote:
>>Wanna know what's always bothered me about the way we describe >>hierarchies? We call the predecessor and successor parent and child and >>then throw in the autogenesis rule: "A child can have only one parent." >>There are very few children with only one parent... WTF do we use those >>terms?
>
>
> I think hierarchy was originally was related to the power structure
> among preists. May be the emphasis on one parent came from there.
>
>
>>Go for it all! Do real graphs!! Don't think, "I'll figure out hierarchies first, then retrofit whatever it might take to do graphs."
>
>
> Do you consider graphs and networks to be the same or different?
>
Yes. Received on Tue Dec 19 2006 - 07:18:58 CET