• 9 labels Yes, the “digit” restriction should be abstracted away when reasoning about the concept; When I read the paper, I tended to agree that in practice, though, digits are easy to deal with, and it doesn’t hurt introducing another fractional digit without semantics only in order to have enough places to fit things into.
But it doesn’t work well with the concept of having only an existential (1–9) and universal (0) qualifier. So sadly, we have to get around that limitation some way or th’other, I think. • edges I totally forgot about this when dealing with lines of the example which never contained 0s (other than implicitely trailing ones) because I think data should always look like that (regex): [1-9]+ with implicit trailing 0* So that’s another question @Bo: do we need to have things like 32051 in any place other than in a query? it used to describe a concept, but I think that was merely an aid for people thinking in terms of variables and relational db otoh, the example explicitely praised the benefits of being able to see which concepts are met by a query so maybe we have to deal with this I just had some ideas and they all don’t get it done correctly. I need to take some rest first, but the representations we have been constructing are obviously insufficient. Am 10.01.21 um 12:29 schrieb Raul Miller: > This system supports different kinds of transitive or "edge" concepts. > > There's strict sequence (no zeros). > > There's also allowance for alternatives (with zeros). > > It's also a bit awkward that you're limited to 9 labels at any level, > which implies some shenanigans with large and/or growing data sets. > > FYI, > -- ---------------------- mail written using NEO neo-layout.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
