A plehtora of Quantities
gtr at ast.cam.ac.uk
Fri May 14 05:59:50 PDT 2004
I think it's a bit more than labelling. Call them A and B if you like, but B
is a wider issue than A and needs more structure and subtlety. Imposing this
extra material on A is a problem.
On Fri, 14 May 2004, David Berry wrote:
> > > Not really- I think the idea is that the "list inside the Quantity" more
> > > closely reflects the general case where you have a whole list of *values*
> > > for a single (possibly compound) *phenomenon*. So a Quantity contains a
> > > "list of values" (the ValuesList of Mapping) and a description of the
> > > single phenomenon (the Frame).
> > OK, I understand. But if we're modelling Phenomemon, then that's a different
> > and much bigger thing than Quantity. Can we have a nice, simple Quanitity as
> > a separate product?
> Language is a problem - telepathy is what we need! Yes, we need both
> things, but what shall we call them? Maybe we should drop the Q word
> altogether and use "Value" and "Array" instead. The song "I say potato
> and you say potato" springs to mind (but lets not "call the whole thing
Guy Rixon gtr at ast.cam.ac.uk
Institute of Astronomy Tel: +44-1223-337542
Madingley Road, Cambridge, UK, CB3 0HA Fax: +44-1223-337523
More information about the dm