graydon2.dreamwidth.org/193447

"Always bet on text" is a good philosophy that I *almost* buy, except for one thing:

I'm yet to find any reasonable plaintext representation of graphs. Text can do trees just fine, but trees are inherently limiting. If there's no efficient notation for DAGs and graphs with cycles - i.e. structures that can't trivially be flattened without duplicating nodes - then text itself is heavily limited as a tool for thought.

Anyone knows of any interesting work in this space?

#compsci

Follow

@temporal The original article is also kinda disingenuous because if you have text organised in graphs or tables, or even in mathematical notation, it's not just text, it's text and structure. Text alone would in fact be incredibly tedious for a lot of things.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
TyNET

This is the Mastodon instance for TyNET users. If you have a TyNET account, you will automatically receive a Mastodon account with it. You can use this for general purpose chatting.