#19141: Poset documentation polishing: Boolean-valued properties
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jmantysalo | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.10
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: poset | Merged in:
Authors: Jori Mäntysalo | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jmantysalo/poset_documentation_polishing__boolean_valued_properties|
23c9b77b43ca19c73e49e7a5250c0e982b2859dc
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by jmantysalo):
* status: needs_review => needs_work
Comment:
Replying to [comment:12 vdelecroix]:
> '''chain''' is standard terminology for poset. Why would you want to
remove it? Instead I suggest to make `is_totally_ordered` as an alias for
`is_chain`. Moreover there is the notion of '''antichain''' that does not
have a ''anti totally ordered'' counterpart.
True, ''antiordered'' does not sound good.
So I guess I will revert this change. The reason was possible confusion of
a set being a chain of poset and a whole poset being a chain.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19141#comment:13>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
