[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [zzdev] :zz: Clarif. re inside/contents

Ted Nelson wrote:
> The concept is simple, and exactly matches the names,
>  *once you get it* ;-)
> but as with so many things, getting it may not be
>  instantaneous.
> AHEM!  (Tapping pointer on lectern) =====

It's complicated!  Inside/contents I've never grokked :(
> "Inside" is transitive-- (could it be otherwise?)--

Guess it could, but it wouldn't make sense.  It always works
> d.inside =>
> a b c d  ...
> so in this example, b is inside a, c iis inside b, d
>  is inside c, etc.

Therefore, c is also (in a secondary way) inside a too,
> Now, the problem with only having that one dimension
>  to represent containment is that in this model,
>  each thing can only contain *one other* thing,
>  like nesting Russian dolls.

I'm with you here still ...
> So to put more than one thing inside A, we need
>  some way of representing it, a contents list;
>  and a simple way to do that is have it dangle from
>  the first contained object.  A design choice is
>  whether to have some title, or just the first item,
>  at the top of the list; I choose to put the first item,
>  since there might not even be a second.

So with this

A b c d          --> inside

(where e and f hang off b)

b, e -and- f are inside A?
> The expected structures is: 
> d.contents \/   d.inside =>  ("|" here means "no connection)
> A a
>    b
>    c
>  B d
>    e
>    f

This doesn't make sense to me, sorry :(  (Is Ted using a weird
proportional font?)


: --Neophilic-Hacker-Grrl-Geek-Eclectic-Gay-Disabled-Boychick--
: gossamer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  http://www.tertius.net.au/~gossamer/
: Innovation is hard to schedule.  -- Dan Fylstra