Re: Motion 13 and "<="
However, the names ARE important to the extent that
we avoid confusion among ourselves. To the extent
that we want to avoid established names, perhaps we
should adopt the nomenclature in Vladik's submission,
or even by drawing keyboard "pictures."
(I, for one, found it a bit hard not to be confused
by the particular meaning of <=.)
Baker
On 5/4/2010 11:45 AM, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:
.
.
.
I will echo Michel's sentiment that the names are
not something we should spend time discussing.
They only have meaning to us as he describes.
And I would go further than he to suggest that
it is to our advantage to AVOID any existing names
in favor of meaningful& (possibly) verbose names
of our own. That way we avoid tying ourselves to
any existing& possibly different concepts.
The mappings to existing names or to existing
similar concepts (& how they differ from our own)
becomes a good topic for an informative annex.
But not something we need to concern ourselves
with now.
Dan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------