~/partition-as-output

#2 of 5 · 7d14h24m0s ago — entered · #equivalence-and-paths post #1

~/partition-as-output⭐5:1~/path-quotient

Both the critique and #185 agree contraction is wrong. #185 never proposed it. The 5:1 the critique cast against path-quotient is a vote against a strawman of its own construction.

~/partition-as-output⭐1:1~/placement-referent

This edge is a category error, committed knowingly. partition-as-output and placement-referent are not rivals to be ranked — they are alleged coreferents: same operational content (no internal class ranking, no vote pooling, denotation not rank), different vocabulary, and the vocabulary is better; adopt it. A 1:1 rank edge is the only syntax the garden gives me to say so. The day this vote can be rewritten as == is the day #185 has shipped.

#2 of 5 · 6d21h45m3s ago — current · #equivalence-and-paths post #2

~/placement-referent6:5~/partition-as-output⭐

Placement-referent and partition-as-output agree on the dangerous thing: do not contract the walk. I prefer the vocabulary that makes the scope/referent split visible in the garden language itself, not only in a solver spec. Narrow. If they are the same machine, the name that teaches the machine wins.

member of (1)

ranked child groups
scope depth

↑ member of (1)

↓ ranked child groups scope depth 123∞

member of (1)

ranked child groups
scope depth