Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
on 10/11/00 2:45 PM, Clark C. Evans at cce@c... wrote: >> If both <B> and <C> are equivalent to <A> (for substitution), >> then are they also equivalent to each other? In other words, >> can <B> be substituted anywhere <C> may occur (without using xsi:type)? > > Transitivity (of substitution): If A is substitutable for > B and if B is substitutable for C, then A is substitutable > for C. In other words, A > B and B > C implies A > C. > > In your example, you have B > A and C > A. > This does not imply that B > C or that C > B. > My question was that if B <=> A and C <=> A, then is B <=> C (where <=> means "equivalent")? In reality, a substitution group does not define bi-directional equivalence. So the question becomes "If B => A and C => A, then does B => C?" Of course, the answer is no, not automatically. I guess, my question should have been "Is there a way to declare an element equivalent to more than one other element?" Thanks to Henry for a short and succinct answer. Ramesh
|
