Re: [unrev-II] Use Case...Competing Reductions

From: Eric Armstrong (
Date: Wed Apr 12 2000 - 20:32:35 PDT

  • Next message: Eric Armstrong: "Re: [unrev-II] Project Meeting Agenda"

    I think the problem is the use of the word "summary".
    A more accurate title would be more like "reduction by
    version replacement" -- not a "summary" in the sense of
    eliminating all detail to get a high level view, but an
    "codified version", usually introduced with a phrase like,
    "let me try to summarize the issues here", which condenses
    a wandering discussion, eliminating the extraneous and
    pinpointing the important statements.

    This thread is going to be a great example. At the end,
    there should be a better formulation of the case. That
    reformulation then needs to *replace* the total discussion
    in the high level view of the archive.

    Note that the reformulation is still likely to be a
    hierarchy. When that hierarchy replaces this one, the
    result is a condensed version, hopefully a readable and
    well-organized one.

    Also: The term "reduction" might need to be replaced by
    "abstraction", or something similar. The point being that
    the next reader doesn't have to follow the whole chain
    of reasoning, but can start with the conclusion, only
    going deeper if interested.

    1.6 Million Digital Images!
    Download one Today from

    Community email addresses:
      Post message:
      List owner:

    Shortcut URL to this page:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 12 2000 - 20:40:10 PDT