non-orthogonal means that the dimensions are not truly independent. In a compact display, this would also mean that some significant part of the information is not shown.
For example, instead of having just an x axis (at "0 degrees") and a y axis (at "90 degrees") we could have the y axis at 45 degrees and a z axis at 90 degrees. Or, we could have the y axis at 30 degrees and the z axis at 60 degrees and some other axis (the "aa axis"?) at 90 degrees. Or... we could use some other sets of angles... -- Raul On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM, bob therriault <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Raul, > > Yeah, I wondered about that, which is why I put orthogonal in quotes. So > what did you mean by an non-orthogonal presentation? I am intrigued. > > Cheers, bob > > On 2013-01-14, at 10:28 AM, Raul Miller wrote: > >>>> We can use a non-othogonal presentation of dimensions. >>>> >>> I think that this is closer to the direction that I chose, if I understand >>> your use of 'orthogonal' to mean that the dimensions would need to remain >>> independent in how they affected the representation. My choice was to >>> enclose each group of 3 dimensions within a cube and then use these cubes >>> to build higher dimensions. Once you get above 6, things start to get messy >>> and so the challenge becomes what you can leave out without creating >>> ambiguity. >> >> Actually, I'd classify this as "boxing". > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
