Michel Hack wrote:
I vote YES on Motion 13.04 -- seven standardized interval comparators.
This is a good compromise. Three may be theoretically sufficient, but
implementations are likely to provide more, and it would be a shame is
this resulted in a mess of similar but not identical operations.
Motion 13.04 says in the abstract: ''the number of comparison relations
defined by the standard should be kept to a minimum.''
But Motion 13.04 provides only 1/3rd of the necessary comparisons,
and only 1/7th of the comparisons provided are necessary.
Thus the motion is self-contradictory.
Motion 13.04 requires 7 transitive relations,
only the second of which is actually useful.
The interior relation (the fifth) is not the topological one,
and hence will only cause confusion.
Two relations
disjoint
interior(topological)
-- both very important in practice -- are missing,
Thus Motion 13.04 is _not_ a compromise, but something quite
different from my proposal.