Re: The point of ur-elements

I'm not unsympathetic to your line of thought here, Aatu. But I wonder
what we should say about e.g. talk of sets when doing formal
semantics ...

So here's a domain (a set of cows, as it might be!); we interpret the
relation of "mother of" as a set of ordered pairs of cows {<Daisy,
Bluebell>, <Bluebell, Pansy>, ...}.

It seems that we fall very naturally here into talking about sets
whose members (or the members of the members of the members, or
whatever} are indeed cows.

Do you want to say that a general theory of sets shouldn't deal with
such cases? Or that we shouldn't, after all, use set talk in doing
formal semantics?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Web Services and Strongly Typed Collections
    ... My application requires the use of strongly typed collections. ... This means I need the semantics of an ArrayList which supports members like Add, Item, Remove, Count etc - but returns a strongly typed object reference instead of System.Object. ... Now I realise that what I'm doing goes against the grain of SOA and loosely coupled message exchanges etc, but for numerous reasons .NET Remoting isn't an option whereas Web Services are the only option. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.webservices)
  • Collection order
    ... >If I create a collection and add members using the Add ... it depends on the semantics of the collection. ... items according to their hash value; Dictionary will sort ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: auto_ptr in exception safety design
    ... I think maybe he means deep copy auto_ptr members ... (when talking about the right semantics) ... when do construction and assignment? ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.language)
  • Re: Cantor and the binary tree
    ... > G. Frege wrote: ... >> Consider a set of cows, C, i.e. given some c e C, c is a cow. ... But apparently WM cannot distinguish between sets and their members. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast