Re: 0 SET-ORDER why?

On 2024-09-22 13:52, Ruvim wrote:

On 2024-09-21 23:37, Anthony Howe wrote:

On 2024-07-01 05:02, Ruvim wrote:

And if the term "minimum search order" is renamed to "small search order" (as an example), will this solve the problem?

>
Minimum functional search order?

I like `functional`.

>

 Good idea!
 Similar variants:
   - minimum usable search order
   - minimum operable search order
   - minimum operative search order
   - minimum operational search order

And this one -----^ `operational`
But I think as long as the wording makes clear its not the empty set, pick something nice and use consistently should be good.
--
Anthony C Howe
achowe@snert.com                                   BarricadeMX & Milters
http://nanozen.snert.com/                          http://software.snert.com/