[HN Gopher] Deml: Directed Acyclic Graph Elevation Markup Language
___________________________________________________________________
Deml: Directed Acyclic Graph Elevation Markup Language
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 67 points
Date : 2025-09-30 14:12 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| FilipSivak wrote:
| There is a professor Jiri Demel in Prague with Czech Technical
| University with a book "Graphs and their applications". Is this
| in any way a tribute to him? He is very wholesome guy that tought
| me graphs :).
|
| edit: link https://kix.fsv.cvut.cz/~demel/grafy/
| michalsustr wrote:
| and prof. Demlova too :) nice to see fellows from my alma mater
| here!
|
| https://math.fel.cvut.cz/en/people/demlova/
| max_ wrote:
| Unfortunately I cant find the book "Graphs and their
| applications".
|
| Is there a PDF link?
|
| There is this - https://kix.fsv.cvut.cz/~demel/grafy/gr.pdf
|
| But I was hoping for an English version?
| falcor84 wrote:
| Isn't this upriver/downriver/elevation terminology just a
| fancy/ignorant way of saying "topological ordering"?
| cubefox wrote:
| Not sure what that is, but DAGs represent "acyclic" binary
| relations (like "flows from x to y"), and acyclicity of a
| relation is a generalization of a partial order relation, which
| is itself a generalization of a total order relation.
| munificent wrote:
| No, a topological ordering is an actual _ordering_. It 's
| putting all of the elements in a collection in some linear
| order based on dependencies between them.
|
| The output of this language/library is a graph, not a
| linearization.
|
| The river terminology is probably best described as a metaphor
| to help someone understand what a DAG is.
| sfink wrote:
| A dag represents a _partial_ ordering. (Strictly speaking you
| could have redundant edges in a dag which wouldn 't change the
| partial ordering, so dag != partial order.)
|
| upriver/downriver is the partial order relationship between
| nodes.
|
| elevation is partway to a complete topological ordering -- as
| in, an assignment of elevations to nodes must follow the
| partial ordering, but there are multiple possible assignments
| in general, so it is _a_ way to produce a set of elevation
| groupings but not the _only_ way.
|
| For example, if you have UP -> A -> B -> DOWN and UP -> X ->
| DOWN, then you could make elevation grouping {UP}, {A, X}, {B},
| {DOWN} or {UP}, {A}, {B, X}, {DOWN} and both groupings satisfy
| the same partial ordering (and follow the same dags).
|
| You could make a canonical elevation grouping by doing a
| breadth first search from the root node(s) and grouping by
| distance from the roots, or a different one by starting from
| the leaf/leaves. Though then the distinction between dags and
| partial orders comes in; your canonical grouping would have to
| be a BFS of a minimal dag without any "redundant" edges (any
| edge where removing it would not change the partial ordering).
|
| You can't derive a dag or even just its partial ordering from
| either a topological ordering or an elevation grouping.
| Topological ordering A,B,C could come from A->B->C or from
| A->B, A->C (or the edgeless A, B, C!) Elevation grouping {A},
| {B, C}, {D} could come from A->B->D, A->C->D or A->B->D, A->C.
|
| I _think_ you could order all of these from least information
| to most?: 1. topological ordering 2. elevation grouping 3.
| partial ordering 4. dag
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| Every time somebody tries to make a super-simplistic ASCII file
| format to make raw data "easy for humans", it either ends up
| sucking for humans, or sucking for computers, or both. I get it,
| the programmer is lazy, so the programmer finds a way to do
| something they find easier. But that's what gave us YAML and
| Markdown - the former setting us back in both data serialization
| and configuration formats, the latter setting us back in document
| formatting and layout.
|
| It's 2025. Enough with the ASCII. As a human, if I want to map
| out and display a DAG, I don't want to do it in a text file. Give
| me a UI or give me death.
| joemi wrote:
| You seem to be confusing the concept of a language with the
| concept of program used to write in a language. DEML is a
| language (that's what the "L" is for). A program with a UI,
| graphical or otherwise, can be used to create a DAG, and then
| that DAG can be saved in a DEML representation.
|
| With that in mind, what you seem to be bothered by (please
| correct me if I'm wrong) is actually that a language has been
| released without a UI to abstract away the process of writing
| it?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-09-30 23:01 UTC)