[Om3] binary vs n-ary relations

[Jan Willem Knopper]

Professor James Davenport wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Jan Willem Knopper wrote:
> > Chris Rowley wrote:
> > I would assume a rel b rel c is almost the same as a rel b and b rel c
> > (where rel is a relation).
> I would claim that it is EXACTLY the same (and therefore redundant). I do 
> not know where it conveys different information, and if it does, it 
> certainly needs documenting, so Michael's "making them n-ary" doesn't 
> work. 
...
> As I said, I'm not sure I understand why you would want the SEMANTICS of 
> this, as I am not sure what they are.
You have convinced me.

There are no obvious semantics differences here, and I am not sure
enough that I actually need anything like the semantics of a formula
manipulation. 

Regards,

Jan Willem
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://openmath.org/pipermail/om3/attachments/20080925/3bc5de3b/attachment.pgp