Joined: June 2006
We may finally get a picture of what Joe thinks a nested hierarchy is. Exciting.
If he dodges this, he truly has no idea how to eat his own breakfast cereal and we should call 911.
|Perhaps "descendant" is a poor choice of words. However, the point is much th same; I think we agree. I just want to make sure before we continue.|
Any unit in the structure (say "Squad") is completely contained in the unit above it ("Platoon" in this case). However, there exist such Platoons that a particular Squad is not contained in. This is what I meant by using the word "descendants". It is also what I meant by the possible unclarity of the diagram. I merely stated that it was possible to misconstrue what the NH was in that diagram--not that it was wrong or could not be easily learned (I guess you missed that part).
So, do we agree that there exists some "Squad A" that is contained in "Platoon X" and that "Squad A" is not contained in any "Platoon ~X"?
Likewise IF "Squad A" is contained in "Platoon X" AND "Platoon X" is not contained in "Company Y", THEN there exists no situation in which "Squad A" is contained in "Company Y".
This is my contention for a NH. Does it jibe with yours?
Read it here.
Scroll down to about the 33rd comment or so.
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG
And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin