|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Correction to 'structure'
|
interpretation in the body of the article by CWoo
Correction id: 13251
Filed on: 2007-11-15 18:46:35
Status: Accepted on 2007-11-15 23:27:39
Type: Meta/Minor
Correction text:
Hi, "interpretation" should be mentioned somewhere in the content of the article...
Also, should there be a comma between "structure" and "interpretation" in the Also Defines Box? |
Comment from correction handler ratboy:
Hi, "interpretation" should be mentioned somewhere in the content of the article...
Also, should there be a comma between "structure" and "interpretation" in the Also Defines Box?
The notion of structure in itself has nothing to do with interpretation, as there is no language explicitly involved. The triple (signature, structure, language) needs to be presented in parallel. Currently it appears to me that the various notions have been strewn about randomly. For example, of the properties of structures, why does cardinality merit special mention? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
