Indicators

[John P. Morgan]

Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 15:16:14 +0100
From: Peter Cameron <p.j.cameron at qmul.ac.uk>

>
>On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:10:26PM +0100, Leonard Soicher wrote:
>> ... it seems that the "affine-like" indicator,
>> if we have one, should be true iff the block design is resolvable and
>> any two blocks in different parallel classes of a resolution meet in a
>> constant number \mu of points.  I would support such an "affine-like"
>> indicator.  Would others?
>>
>This is what I argued for: it is exactly what I understand "affine" to mean.
>Of course it is not atomic, but as Leonard says, there is no nice atomic
>indicator which when conjoined with "resolvable" gives "affine".
>
>Peter. 
>

Sounds like we have converged. Somehow I did not understand from Peter's earlier 
posting that he was arguing for a specific implementation, so raised the issue 
of concept separate from that of name. Anyway, it seems as if we do have an 
agreed implementation now. Thanks to Peter and Leonard for getting us there. JP