[Latingp] Consistency in analysis

[Bill Jouris]

If I'm understanding this correctly, what I should do in the analysis sheets I am developing is to assure that, if we have 
Set 1 = {A, B}





Set 2 = {A, C}
Then we also have Set 3 = {B, C}



Correct? 
Bill Jouris
Inside Products
bill.jouris at insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct) 

    On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 10:29:36 AM PDT, Tan Tanaka, Dennis via Latingp <latingp at icann.org> wrote:  
 
  <!--#yiv6098125630 _filtered #yiv6098125630 {font-family:Wingdings;panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} _filtered #yiv6098125630 {font-family:"Cambria Math";panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv6098125630 {font-family:DengXian;panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} _filtered #yiv6098125630 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv6098125630 {panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}#yiv6098125630 #yiv6098125630 p.yiv6098125630MsoNormal, #yiv6098125630 li.yiv6098125630MsoNormal, #yiv6098125630 div.yiv6098125630MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;}#yiv6098125630 a:link, #yiv6098125630 span.yiv6098125630MsoHyperlink {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6098125630 a:visited, #yiv6098125630 span.yiv6098125630MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:#954F72;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6098125630 span.yiv6098125630EmailStyle17 {font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv6098125630 .yiv6098125630MsoChpDefault {font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;} _filtered #yiv6098125630 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv6098125630 div.yiv6098125630WordSection1 {}-->
All, let me try to explain the problem of excluding certain code points from different sets when doing the analysis.
 
  
 
Let’s assume two scenarios for the hypothetical analysis:
 
  
 
Scenario 1:
 
  
 
Set 1 = {A, B}
 
  
 
Set 2 = {A, C}
 
  
 
For Set 1, it was concluded A is a variant of B.
 
  
 
In Set 2, it was concluded A is not a variant of C.
 
  
 
Then, the only resulting variant set is Aà B (symmetry implied)
 
  
 
Scenario 2:
 
  
 
                Set 1 = {A, B}
 
  
 
                Set 3 = {A, B, C}
 
  
 
                For Set 1, A is deemed variant of B
 
  
 
                In Set 3, A is deemed variant of B, B deemed a variant of C, but A not a variant of C.
 
  
 
                The resulting variant sets are Aà B, Bà C; and due to transitivity AàC is also a variant pair.
 
  
 
My point was that by excluding a code point from the analysis can result in different result as to the variant sets identified.
 
  
 
Hope this helps clarify.
 
  
 
Dennis
 
  
 _______________________________________________
Latingp mailing list
Latingp at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/latingp

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/latingp/attachments/20191024/71c81b4a/attachment.html>