#19360: Poset documentation polishing: comparing & intervals
----------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: jmantysalo | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.10
Component: documentation | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jori Mäntysalo | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
----------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by kdilks):
I thought I responded to this, but maybe this was the response I had typed
out just after my free 30 minute wifi session at O'Hare expired...
I don't think relations are often (or ever) called intervals. So deprecate
that, but maybe add a docstring comment to {{{relations()}}} indicating
that the number of relations is the number of intervals, and is thus the
dimension of the incidence algebra.
Not especially a fan of {{{comparable_pairs()}}}, just because technically
speaking pairs are unordered, and we care about the order of the pair. I
also don't think {{{chains(size=2)}}} would be a good option, either.
The way that I think of posets (and the way the poset constructor thinks
of them) is that you have data of a ground set and relations, and how all
of that data interacts makes a poset structure. Things like chains and
intervals are properties of the entire poset structure, whereas relations
are an individual piece of the defining data.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19360#comment:2>
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.
